1996
DOI: 10.1016/0166-0934(96)02071-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of capillary blood versus venous blood samples in the assessment of immunity to measles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
15
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
1
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It has previously been demonstrated that dried blood spots are a feasible alternative to venous blood as a specimen for use in investigations for measles virus antibodies (2,3,5,10). The present study demonstrates for the first time the feasibility of laboratory diagnosis of measles by use of dried blood specimens with a commercial assay.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…It has previously been demonstrated that dried blood spots are a feasible alternative to venous blood as a specimen for use in investigations for measles virus antibodies (2,3,5,10). The present study demonstrates for the first time the feasibility of laboratory diagnosis of measles by use of dried blood specimens with a commercial assay.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 69%
“…Several groups have demonstrated a good correlation between serum and peripheral (finger or heel) blood for determination of measles virus antibody titers (2,3,10,15). Our results should therefore be equally applicable to capillary blood specimens.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The EIA‐related enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is an attractive method given the commercial availability of a variety of kits and hence suitability for use in cross‐study and cross‐laboratory comparisons. In DBS, ELISA‐based measurements of measles‐specific IgG have been limited to studies using the Dade Behring Enzygnost ELISA [Novello et al, ; Riddell et al, ; Samoĭlovich et al, ]. There is therefore a need to evaluate additional ELISA kits to avoid dependence upon a single source.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%