检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:王强[1]
机构地区:[1]解放军第404医院检验科,山东威海264200
出 处:《临床军医杂志》2005年第6期752-753,共2页Clinical Journal of Medical Officers
摘 要:目的比较放射免疫分析与电化学发光免疫法两种方法的检测质量。方法同时用电化学发光免疫法和放射免疫分析法对100份血清标本的CEA含量进行检测,然后对结果进行比较分析。结果两种方法检测结果无差异(P>0.05),其相关性良好(r=0.9 879),稳定性、灵敏度、精密度、检测速度等电化学发光免疫法均显著优于放射免疫分析法。结论电化学发光免疫法是一种工作效率高,检测结果稳定、可靠,灵敏度高的检测仪器。Objective To compare the test qualities between electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLI) and Radioimmunoassay. Methods The quantities of carcinoembryonic antigen ( CEA ) were detected respectively by ECLI and radioimmunoassay (RIA) in 100 serum samples. Results There were no significant differences in the outcomes between the two detecting methods ( P 〉 0.05 ) , and their correlation was obvious ( r = 0. 9879 ). Furthermore, ECLI has an obvious advantage over RIA on the aspects of stability, sensitivity, precision and detecting speed. Conclusion ECLI is a steady and reliable laboratory assay with high efficiency and sensitivity.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.145