ArticleClinical and vaccine immunology : CVI2012
A high percentage of serum samples that test reactive by enzyme immunoassay for anti-Brucella antibodies are not confirmed by the standard tube agglutination test.
Article in Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis: evolving synergy between serological testing and next-generation sequencing.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Review
- IgM and IgG Epitope Mapping of the Porin Outer Membrane Protein-2a fromInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Clinical Interpretation of Detection of IgM Anti-Polish journal of microbiology · 2019Article
- Detection of IgM antibrucella antibody in the absence of IgGs: a challenge for the clinical interpretation of brucella serology.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We describe a retrospective analysis of Brucella enzyme immunoassay (EIA) IgM and IgG results compared to those of the standard tube agglutination test (SAT). Among 1,091 samples tested, 104 (9.5%) and 24 (2.2%) sera were positive by IgM and IgG EIA, respectively. Supplemental testing by SAT showed that 82.7% (86/104) of IgM EIA-reactive samples and 54.2% (13/24) of IgG EIA-reactive samples were negative by SAT. Testing all EIA screen-reactive samples by SAT is required when evaluating patients for potential brucellosis. Due to the limitations of serology, culture remains the gold standard for detecting Brucella infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.