Table 3

Examination of Panel 1 and 2 sera: Comparison of all serological tests*

Assays compared

Number (percentage) of animals reacting similarly in the tests compared

30 sera of Panel 1

Selection of 30 sera of Panel 2 (including IBT)

All 178 sera of Panel 2

(without IBT)


cELISA and in-house CFT

21 (70%), ĸ = 0,46c

18 (60%), ĸ = 0,33d

114 (70%), ĸ = 0,43c

cELISA and CIRAD CFT

23 (77%), ĸ = 0,58c

18 (60%), ĸ = 0,33d

108 (62%), ĸ = 0,38d

In-house CFT and CIRAD CFT

27 (90%), ĸ = 0,79a

30 (100%), ĸ = 1,00a

161 (90%), ĸ = 0,80a

In-house CFT and IBT

21 (70%), ĸ = 0,39d

26 (87%), ĸ = 0,33d

CIRAD CFT and IBT

21 (70%), ĸ = 0,39d

26 (87%), ĸ = 0,33d

cELISA and IBT

17 (57%), ĸ = 0,23d

19 (63%), ĸ = 0,38d

In-house CFT, CIRAD CFT and cELISA

21(70%)

18 (60%)

102 (59%)

In-house CFT, CIRAD CFT, cELISA and IBT

15 (45%)

18 (60%)


* Kappa agreement testing [23] was additionally conducted. According to standard criteria, the concordance between two tests compared is classified as a very good (1-0.76), b good (0.75-0.61), c acceptable (0.6-0.4), d poor (< 0.4).

Schubert et al. BMC Veterinary Research 2011 7:72   doi:10.1186/1746-6148-7-72

Open Data