| 1. |
- Dunham, I, et al.
(författare)
-
The DNA sequence of human chromosome 22
- 1999
-
Ingår i: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 402:6761, s. 489-495
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Newman, D J, et al.
(författare)
-
Serum cystatin C measured by automated immunoassay : a more sensitive marker of changes in GFR than serum creatinine
- 1995
-
Ingår i: Kidney International. - : Elsevier BV. - 0085-2538. ; 47, s. 312-318
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Serum cystatin C has been suggested as a new marker of GFR. For the introduction of this marker into clinical use a rapid and automated method is required. We have developed and validated an assay for serum cystatin C using latex particle-enhanced immunoturbidimetry. Intra- and inter-assay precision were < 3% and < 5% across the assay range. Analytical recovery was 93 +/- 3.8% and no lack of parallelism was demonstrated. Regression analysis of a method comparison with an enzyme-enhanced radial-immunodiffusion method, gave PETIA = 0.074 + 0.93 x SRID, r = 0.98, N = 100. Inter-assay precision profiles showed cystatin C was measured with two-fold better precision than creatinine on the same analyzer. Cystatin C measurement was neither interfered with by icterus nor by hemolysis. 1/cystatin C versus 1/creatinine concentrations gave r = 0.67, N = 469. Comparison of Cr EDTA GFR with 1/cystatin C and 1/creatinine gave r = 0.81 and 0.50, respectively, N = 206. Calculating diagnostic sensitivity for abnormal GFR showed cystatin C to be significantly (P < 0.05) more sensitive than creatinine (71.4 vs. 52.4%). Cystatin C measurement using PETIA technology can be automated on the same instruments used routinely for the measurement of creatinine and offers better analytical performance and probably improved clinical sensitivity as a screening test for early renal damage.
|
|
| 9. |
- Pahlm, Ulrika, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of teaching the basic electrocardiographic concept of frontal plane QRS axis using the classical versus the orderly electrocardiogram limb lead displays
- 1997
-
Ingår i: American Heart Journal. - 1097-6744. ; 134:6, s. 1014-1018
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study compares the effectiveness of teaching the calculation of frontal plane QRS axis with the use of the classical versus the orderly electrocardiographic limb lead display. Eighty-three students from two environments were randomized into two groups and were taught to determine frontal plane axis with one of the methods. The accuracy and time to determine the axis were tested on 10 electrocardiograms. In the United States the group using the classical display achieved 4.2 (+/-2.7) correct answers, whereas those using the orderly method achieved 6.8 (+/-3.0) (p = 0.0006). The classical group used 9.2 (+/-2.8) minutes to complete the test, whereas the orderly group needed 7.2 (+/-2.0) minutes (p = 0.015). The results achieved in Sweden were similar. The use of the orderly electrocardiographic limb lead display results in greater diagnostic accuracy in less time than the classical display when determining the frontal plane QRS axis.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
