Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1997-6-20
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
The Etest and the NCCLS method are not much differing in respect to their reproducibility. Only single observations exist on the clinical correlation of both tests. The correlation between both tests are known as being dependent on the yeast species and antifungals used. Due to the easy and simple handling the Etest is attractive for routine laboratories. The Etest has to be more evaluated before it can be generally recommended. The NCCLS method also is not validated until now. Different test methods should be compared thoroughly with the above mentioned standard.
|
| pubmed:language |
ger
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:chemical | |
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:issn |
0933-7407
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
39 Suppl 2
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
44-6
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2006-11-15
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1996
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
[The Etest--an alternative to the NCLLS standard for susceptibility testing of yeasts?].
|
| pubmed:affiliation |
Robert Koch-Institut, Berlin, BR Deutschland.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article,
Comparative Study,
English Abstract
|