1985
DOI: 10.1590/s0037-86821985000200009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Exames de laboratório: sensibilidade, especificidade, valor preditivo positivo

Abstract: A evolução do conhecimento médico impõe aos profissionais a necessidade de utilizarem exames subsidiários para confirmar ou afastar uma hipótese diagnostica, e dos laboratórios de análises clínicas se exige que correspondam a essa expectativa executan do exames que estabeleçam com precisão e exatidão um diagnóstico.Admitindo-se que um laboratório trabalhe em condições ótimas, com reagentes de boa qualidade e dentro dos prazos de validade propostos, técnicas adequadas, pessoal perfeitamente treinado, equipa men… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
4

Year Published

1988
1988
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
2
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…In previous studies, the DPP ® test showed specificity ranging from 87.8% to 98.6% and sensitivity between 90.6% and 98% using confirmed positive samples 9,10 . However, despite showing high levels of sensitivity among clinically symptomatic dogs, sensitivity of the DPP ® test to identify the Leishmania infection in asymptomatic dogs was only 47% in one of the studies 13 . In a systematic review and a meta-analysis of the data from 25 studies, Peixoto et al 20 concluded that the ELISA tests using crude antigens and the DPP ® tests have moderate accuracy (83% [ 95% CI: 78%-88%] sensitivity and 73% [ 95% CI: 70%-75%] specificity).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In previous studies, the DPP ® test showed specificity ranging from 87.8% to 98.6% and sensitivity between 90.6% and 98% using confirmed positive samples 9,10 . However, despite showing high levels of sensitivity among clinically symptomatic dogs, sensitivity of the DPP ® test to identify the Leishmania infection in asymptomatic dogs was only 47% in one of the studies 13 . In a systematic review and a meta-analysis of the data from 25 studies, Peixoto et al 20 concluded that the ELISA tests using crude antigens and the DPP ® tests have moderate accuracy (83% [ 95% CI: 78%-88%] sensitivity and 73% [ 95% CI: 70%-75%] specificity).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The results of the two tests were compared using agreement analysis to establish the serological parameters of sensitivity and specificity, and the observed and expected agreement indicators [13][14][15] . The accuracy was expressed by the kappa (κ) index by inferring more rigor in relation to general agreement indicators, taking into account the proportions of the expected and observed agreement.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A partir disso, definiu-se a concentração de 0.2µM como a mais adequada para uma amplificação eficiente, sem excesso de primers, o que poderia ocasionar a formação de dímeros e anelamentos inespecíficos (BUSTIN et al, 2009 Guimarães (1985), para avaliar o desempenho da qPCR frente ao cultivo microbiológico.…”
Section: Reação Em Cadeia Da Polimerase Em Tempo Real (Qpcr)unclassified
“…Para efeito de cálculo da sensibilidade e especificidade do Dot--ELISA, utilizaram-se as fórmulas propostas por Guimarães MCS (1985):…”
Section: Cálculo De Sensibilidade E Especificidadeunclassified