Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 6166593

Errors in microdensitometry.

Abstract

Microdensitometric errors can originate in the instrument, in the specimen or in the human operator. Instrumental sources of systematic error mostly reduce the apparent integrated absorbance, especially of relatively small and highly absorbing objects. They can be assessed, minimized or eliminated by available techniques, but with modern apparatus are in general important only if results of high accuracy are required. Instrument errors include: (a) distributional error, due to the use of too large a measuring spot or the specimen being out of focus; (b) glare (stray light), due mainly to multiple reflections in the microscope objective; (c) monochromator error (the use of insufficiently pure light); (d) calibration errors; and (e) errors resulting from lack of photometric linearity, or the specimen absorbance exceeding the measuring range of the instrument. Specimen errors, including the problems of specificity and stoichiometry, are now the most important obstacles to a wider use of microdensitometry. The following selected topics are briefly discussed: fading; rate of staining; Beer's law deviations and the microdensitometry of opaque particles. Human errors include faulty logic, and failing to attempt an investigation because of anticipated difficulties which are in fact exaggerated or imaginary. The significance of microdensitometric results should, in general, be assessed by biological criteria rather than merely statistically; the use is urged of appropriate internal biological controls and standards wherever possible.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D J Goldstein. 1981. Errors in microdensitometry.. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01006883

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The use of viral culture and p24 antigen testing to diagnose human immunodeficiency virus infection in neonates. The HIV Infection in Newborns French Collaborative Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in infants born to infected mothers is important for the infants' medical care, but the presence of maternal antibodies makes serologic tests uninformative. METHODS: In a cohort study of 181 infants born to HIV-infected mothers, we assessed the diagnostic value of HIV viral culture and testing for the presence of p24 antigen. The infants were tested at birth, again during the first 3 months, then followed and tested at the age of at least 18 months. RESULTS: Of the 181 infants, 3 died of HIV infection and 37 were seropositive after the age of 18 months. Viral cultures at birth were positive in 19 of the 40 infected infants and in none of the uninfected infants, yielding a sensitivity of 48 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 32 to 63 percent) and a specificity of 100 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 97 to 100 percent). By the age of three months, 30 of the 40 infants (75 percent) had positive cultures; again, there were no false positive results among the infants who were tested a second time, of the 141 who remained uninfected. The sensitivity of testing for p24 antigen at birth was only 18 percent, with a specificity of 100 percent. The presence of p24 antigen at birth was associated with the development of early and severe HIV-related disease (P less than 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Viral culture at birth can correctly identify about half of newborns with HIV infection. The fact that this usually sensitive technique fails to identify about half the ultimately infected neonates suggests that vertical transmission of HIV may occur late in pregnancy or during delivery.

False Negative Reactions