Talk:Immunoassay

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Immunoassay.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

I

I will update this page again soon, feel free to collect any mistakes.

Fixed non-working PDF link. --208.114.161.196 15:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technology for collecting an Immunoassay

I red a great article from New Scientist: http://technology.newscientist.com/article/dn12688-diy-lab-scanner-made-from-standard-cd-drive.html

I came here looking to compare the existing expensive technology with this new possibly cheaper technology. Unfortunately, the page so far gives an elaborate definition than a encyclopedic research. I am no doctor that I was hoping someone with better skills in writing these type of articles could include the relevant and related information from the above article, as appropriate.

199.80.154.56 18:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are still interested in the immunoassay technology on a CD platform, you can read about it in the article CD/DVD based immunoassay. This Wikipedia article doesn't draw specifically from the article you read from New Scientist, but it covers relevant information on the technique based on other sources.

Amadell (talk) 01:09, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sensitivity/Specificity

Any word on the accuracy of immunoassays in general? in drug testing they are very sensitive but prone to false positives. --MartinezMD (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should we mention Biotin?

http://endocrinenews.endocrine.org/january-2016-thyroid-month-beware-of-biotin/ "More patients are taking the dietary supplement biotin, which could be throwing off a number of test results from thyroid cancer to Graves’ disease". ee1518 (talk) 13:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

chemiluminescence

Should the article mention chemiluminescent immunoassay,^[1] or should it have its own article? While I read "Bad Blood" some time ago, with the Theranos trial on I got more interested in their technology. Besides the fact that Theranos failed, it does seem to be a good technology. Gah4 (talk) 06:09, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Cinquanta, Luigi. "PMC5483212". Auto Immun Highlights. 8 (1): 9. doi:10.1007/s13317-017-0097-2. PMID 28647912. Retrieved 3 October 2021.

[PMC5483212-1] Cinquanta, Luigi. "PMC5483212". Auto Immun Highlights. 8 (1): 9. doi:10.1007/s13317-017-0097-2. PMID 28647912. Retrieved 3 October 2021.

[1]