The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Laboratory diagnosis and interpretation of tests for syphilis
Open accessAbstract
The lack of a method for demonstrating the presence of Treponema pallidum by growth necessitates the use of alternative methods. Traditionally, these methods are divided into direct detection methods (animal inoculation, dark-field microscopy, etc.) and serologic tests for the presence of patient antibody against T. pallidum. Serologic methods are further divided into two classes. One class, the nontreponemal tests, detects antibodies to lipoidal antigens present in either the host or T. pallidum; examples are the Venereal Disease Research Laboratory and rapid plasma reagin and tests. Reactivity in these tests generally indicates host tissue damage that may not be specific for syphilis. Because these tests are easy and inexpensive to perform, they are commonly used for screening, and with proper clinical signs they are suggestive of syphilis. The other class of test, the treponemal tests, uses specific treponemal antigens. Confirmation of infection requires a reactive treponemal test. Examples of the treponemal tests are the microhemagglutination assay for antibodies to T. pallidum and the fluorescent treponemal antibody absorption test. These tests are more expensive and complicated to perform than the nontreponemal tests. On the horizon are a number of direct antigen, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and PCR techniques. Several of these techniques have shown promise in clinical trials for the diagnosis of congenital syphilis and neurosyphilis that are presently difficult to diagnose.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lukehart, S. A., Hook, E. W., Baker-Zander, S. A., Collier, A. C., Critchlow, C. W., & Handsfield, H. H. (1988) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-109-11-855 · Cited by 603 · cited 3×
“pallidum from the central nervous system (6, 18, 91, 120, 140), it was not possible to evaluate these results with certainty.”
BackgroundINOCULATION SYPHILIS IN HUMAN VOLUNTEERS
MAGNUSON, H. J., THOMAS, E. W., OLANSKY, S., KAPLAN, B. I., MELLO, L. D., & CUTLER, J. C. (1956) · Medicine · doi:10.1097/00005792-195602000-00002 · Cited by 273
(1967) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-66-6-1307_8 · Cited by 72
Cited by
Syphilis: Review with Emphasis on Clinical, Epidemiologic, and Some Biologic Features
Singh, A. E., & Romanowski, B. (1999) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.12.2.187 · Cited by 638
Untreated maternal syphilis and adverse outcomes of pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Gomez, G. B., Kamb, M. L., Newman, L. M., Mark, J., Broutet, N., & Hawkes, S. J. (2013) · Bulletin of the World Health Organization · doi:10.2471/blt.12.107623 · Cited by 634
LaFond, R. E., & Lukehart, S. A. (2006) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.19.1.29-49.2006 · Cited by 634
2020 European guideline on the management of syphilis
Janier, M., Unemo, M., Dupin, N., Tiplica, G. S., Potočnik, M., & Patel, R. (2021) · Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology · doi:10.1111/jdv.16946 · Cited by 421
2014 European guideline on the management of syphilis
Janier, M., Hegyi, V., Dupin, N., Unemo, M., Tiplica, G. S., Potočnik, M., French, P., & Patel, R. (2014) · Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology · doi:10.1111/jdv.12734 · Cited by 360
Metadata
- Authors
- Larsen, S. A., Steiner, B. M., & Rudolph, A. H.
- Venue
- Clinical Microbiology Reviews
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1995-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-21
- ISSN
- 0893-8512 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-6618
- OpenAlex
- W2097565414
- Cited by
- 781
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 5.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Laboratory diagnosis and interpretation of tests for syphilis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/cmr.8.1.1
- The paper
- Larsen, S. A., Steiner, B. M., & Rudolph, A. H. (1995). Laboratory diagnosis and interpretation of tests for syphilis. Clinical Microbiology Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1128/cmr.8.1.1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.