| Literature DB >> 30654811 |
Elif Nurtop1, Paola Mariela Saba Villarroel2,3, Boris Pastorino2, Laetitia Ninove2, Jan Felix Drexler4, Yelin Roca3, Bouba Gake2,5, Audrey Dubot-Peres2, Gilda Grard2,6, Christophe Peyrefitte2,6, Stéphane Priet2, Xavier de Lamballerie2, Pierre Gallian2,7.
Abstract
In the original publication of this article [1], Table 1 has some errors.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30654811 PMCID: PMC6337804 DOI: 10.1186/s12985-019-1118-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Virol J ISSN: 1743-422X Impact factor: 4.099
Comparison of VNT and PRNT assays for a panel of 142 samples
| VNT | PRNT50 | PRNT90 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive (titre ≥10) | Negative (titre < 10) | Positive (titre ≥10) | Negative (titre < 10) | |
| Positive (titre ≥40) | 51 | 1 | 51 | 1 |
| Negative (titre < 40) | 9 | 81 | 1 | 89 |
| Sensitivity of VNT | 85% (51/60) | 98.8% (51/52) | ||
| Specificity of VNT | 98.7% (81/82) | 98.8% (89/90) | ||