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

Hemagglutination inhibition, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and passive latex agglutination were used to test 495 human serum samples for determination of rubella immunity. Overall agreements for immune status were as follows: hemagglutination inhibition versus ELISA, 94.7% (469 of 495); hemagglutination inhibition versus passive latex agglutination (1:10 dilution), 99.2% (491 of 495); and passive latex agglutination (1:10 dilution) versus ELISA, 94.7% (469 of 495). Both ELISA and passive latex agglutination are satisfactory for rubella immunity screening, with the reservation that the ELISA method examined yielded a large number of false-negative results.

journal of clinical microbiology

Comparison of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, hemagglutination inhibition, and passive latex agglutination for determination of rubella immune status