Evaluation of verification assays in EIA specimens presumptively positive for Chlamydia trachomatis

References

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Recommendations for the prevention and management of Chlamydia trachomatis infections, 1993. MMWR 1993; 42: (No. RR-12)
   [Google Scholar]
2. Moncada J., Schachter J., Bolan G. Confirmatory assay increases specificity of the Chlamydiazyme test for Chlamydia trachomatis infection of the cervix. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28:1770–1773
   [Google Scholar]
3. Kellogg J. A., Seiple J. W., Murray C. L., Levisky J. S. Effect of endocervical specimen quality on detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and on the incidence of false-positive results with the Chlamydiazyme method. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28:1105–1113
   [Google Scholar]
4. Schwebke J. R., Stamm W. E., Handsfield H. Use of sequential enzyme immunoassay and direct fluorescent antibody tests for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28:2473–2476
   [Google Scholar]
5. Leonardi G. P., Seitz M., Edstrom R., Cruz J., Costello P., Szabo K. Evaluation of three immunoassays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in urine specimens from asymptomatic males. J Clin Microbiol 1992; 30:2793–2796
   [Google Scholar]
6. Chan E. L., Brandt K., Horsman G. B. A. 1-year evaluation of Syva MicroTrak chlamydia enzyme immunoassay with selective confirmation by direct fluorescent antibody assay in a high-volume laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 1994; 32:2208–2211
   [Google Scholar]