English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Comparative evaluations of immune status for rubella virus are described for enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, hemagglutination inhibition, and indirect hemagglutination. A 92.1% agreement between enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and indirect hemagglutination assay was demonstrated for rubella immune status. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and hemagglutination inhibition demonstrated a 92.6% agreement and were compared in an attempt to define the quantitative usefulness of comparisons of single sera for determining immune status. These data support the relative lack of correlation between single enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and hemagglutination inhibition quantitative values. Enzyme immunoassay was, however, an acceptable alternative to hemagglutination inhibition for the determination of immune status to rubella virus.

journal of clinical microbiology

Comparison of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with indirect hemagglutination and hemagglutination inhibition for determination of rubella virus antibody: evaluation of immune status with commercial reagents in a clinical laboratory