{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017934446505875078, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013605442176870748, 'mean_word_length': 5.446215139442231, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of the latex agglutination test with the hemagglutination inhibition test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and neutralization test for detection of antibodies to rubella virus

The ability of a rapid, latex agglutination test to diagnose rubella infection and to measure immune status was evaluated by comparison with the hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) test, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and the neutralization (NT) test. The latex agglutination test accurately detected serological conversions in 74 pairs of sera representing 21 natural infections and 53 immunizations. The antibody levels of 276 sera from the general population were determined by latex agglutination, HAI, and ELISA. The correlation coefficients between the titers obtained by HAI and latex agglutination and by ELISA and latex agglutination were statistically significant. Results on 12 sera did not agree when measured by the three tests. These sera were included among the 196 specimens tested by NT. The correlation coefficient between NT and latex agglutination titers was statistically significant. There was one serum positive by latex agglutination but negative by NT, and five sera were negative by latex agglutination but had titers of 4 to 8 in the NT. The relative sensitivity of detecting antibody was greater by latex agglutination than by HAI. An additional 49 sera containing residual nonspecific hemagglutinin inhibitors were evaluated by latex agglutination and NT. The untreated sera showed no false positive reactions, and 36 of 39 NT positive sera were positive in the latex agglutination test.