| pubmed-article:18956247 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0021311 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0006303 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0007452 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0011900 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0039593 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0022885 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0035857 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1514721 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1996904 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0205146 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0016316 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1880497 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1510438 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0043445 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0243130 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1280519 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:issue | 5 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:dateCreated | 2009-5-8 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:abstractText | The effectiveness of Rose Bengal test (RBT) and fluorescence polarization assay (FPA) in diagnosing cattle brucellosis in endemic areas was assessed and RBT and FPA test agreement was compared (n = 319). The sensitivity of RBT and FPA in detecting low Brucella titres were evaluated in paired sera (n = 34). A logistic regression model was constructed to predict cattle test result in FPA using RBT as the main predictor and incorporating bio-data and animal history. There was 79.3% agreement between the RBT and FPA (Kappa = 0.59; Std error = 0.05; p = 0.000) and a high correspondence between high RBT scores and positive FPA results suggesting that sera with high RBT score may not require confirmation with tests such as competitive-ELISA or CFT. High FPA cut-off points were more likely to miss animals with low antibody titres. The RBT had a reduced ability in detecting low antibody titres compared to the FPA. FPA test interpretation was improved if a priori information, such as sex and age was used. Under the challenging disease surveillance conditions prevailing in rural Africa, field-testing methods that are sensitive and specific; allow single animal contact, low technical skills in data interpretation are suitable. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:citationSubset | IM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:chemical | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:month | Jun | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:issn | 0049-4747 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:NielsenKK | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:LundAA | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:SkjerveEE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MatopeGG | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MumaJ BJB | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MunyemeMM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MwacalimbaKK | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:issnType | Print | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:volume | 41 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:pagination | 723-9 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:18956247... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:year | 2009 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:articleTitle | Effectiveness of Rose Bengal test and fluorescence polarization assay in the diagnosis of Brucella spp. infections in free range cattle reared in endemic areas in Zambia. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:affiliation | Department of Disease Control, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia. jbwalya@lycos.com | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:publicationType | Comparative Study | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:18956247 | pubmed:publicationType | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | lld:pubmed |
