2015
DOI: 10.15653/tpg-141145
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Der Tuberkulin-Hauttest: Literatur, Richtlinie und Umsetzung in der Praxis

Abstract: In areas severely affected by tuberculosis, the technique of intradermal tuberculosis testing is performed almost as demanded by the Commission Regulation (EC) no. 1226/2002. However, a more uniform and careful approach should be sought when monitoring the results. The guide designed in the context of this study can help to improve the performance of the intradermal tuberculosis test. The information from the literature review also shows that there is currently no standardized method of intradermal tuberculosi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 11 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The wide credibility intervals for the sensitivities (19.6 to 45.6) could be explained by the small data pool of true positive animals. With regard to the estimated test characteristics of the skin tests it has to be considered that these could have been affected by the performance of the skin tests [ 56 ]. The test characteristics of the pathological examination were within both datasets 76.8% (51.6–94.4%) and 78.4% (58.6–93.7%), respectively, for the sensitivity and around 99.0% (96.8–100%) for the specificity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The wide credibility intervals for the sensitivities (19.6 to 45.6) could be explained by the small data pool of true positive animals. With regard to the estimated test characteristics of the skin tests it has to be considered that these could have been affected by the performance of the skin tests [ 56 ]. The test characteristics of the pathological examination were within both datasets 76.8% (51.6–94.4%) and 78.4% (58.6–93.7%), respectively, for the sensitivity and around 99.0% (96.8–100%) for the specificity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%