And intradermal tuberculin test for the diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. Australian Veterinary Journal 1991; 68: 28690. 6. De la Rua-Domenech R, et al. Ante mortem diagnosis of tuberculosis in cattle: a review in the tuberculin tests, gamma-interferon assay as well as other ancillary diagnostic strategies. Analysis in Veterinary Science 2006; 83: 19010. 7. Whipple DL, et al. Comparison on the sensitivity with the caudal fold skin test plus a industrial gammainterferon assay for diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis. American Journal of Veterinary Analysis 1995; 56: 41519. 8. Ryan TJ, Buddle BM, De Lisle GW. An evaluation of the gamma interferon test for detecting bovine tuberculosis in cattle 8 to 28 days just after tuberculin skin testing. Study in Veterinary Science 2000; 69: 571. 9. Buddle BM, Livingstone PG, de Lisle GW. Advances in ante-mortem diagnosis of tuberculosis in cattle. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 2009; 57: 17380. 10. Pollock JM, et al. Distinct delayed-type hypersensitivity responses to ESAT-6 determine tuberculosis-infected cattle.Fenbendazole supplier Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2003; 41: 18561860. 11. Faye S, et al. Determination of decisional cut-off values for the optimal diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis using a modified IFN assay (Bovigam within a low prevalence area in France. Veterinary Microbiology 2011, 151: 607. 12. Branscum AJ, Gardner IA, Johnson WO. Estimation of diagnostic-test sensitivity and specificity via Bayesian modelling.Stemregenin 1 Formula Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2005; 68: 14563. 13. Rutjes AWS, et al. Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is absolutely no gold standard. A evaluation of techniques. Wellness Technologies Assessment 2007; 11: 17. 14. Meyer N, Vinzio S, Goichot B. Bayesian statistics: an approach adapted to clinical studies [in French]. La Revue de M ecine Interne 2009; 30: 24249. 15. Praud A, et al. Assessment of diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of an indirect ELISA kit for the diagnosis 16.17.18.19.20.21.22.23.24.25.26.27.28.29.30.of Brucella ovis infection in rams. BMC Veterinary Investigation 2013; eight: 68.PMID:23357584 Gardner IA, et al. Conditional dependence among tests affects the diagnosis and surveillance of animal illness. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2000; 45: 10722. Dendukuri N, Joseph L. Bayesian approaches to modelling the conditional dependence among a number of diagnostic tests. Biometrics 2001; 57: 15867. Georgiadis MP, et al. Correlation-adjusted estimation of sensitivity and specificity of two diagnostic tests. Journal of Applied Statistics 2003; 52: 638. En C, Georgiadis MP, Johnson WO. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests and disease prevalence when the accurate illness is unknown. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 2000; 45: 611. Domingo ML, et al. Comparison from the efficacy of skin test and gamma-interferon test for the diagnosis of bovine tuberculosis in the field. Medicina Veterinaria 1995; 12: 30717. Gonzalez Llamazares OR, et al. Field evaluation with the single intradermal cervical tuberculin test plus the interferon-gamma assay for detection and eradication of bovine tuberculosis in Spain. Veterinary Microbiology 1999; 70: 55. Cagiola M, et al. Evaluation of probable elements affecting the specificity with the gamma interferon test in tuberculosis-free cattle herds. Clinical and Diagnostic Laboratory Immunology 2004; 11: 65256. Neill SD, et al. The diagnostic of bovine tuberculosis by blood testing. In: Proceedings of your Society for Veterinary Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, 1994. Queen’s University, Belfast.
