This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

ROBERT B. GREENBLATT, M.D.; EVERETT S. SANDERSON, M.D.

Arch Derm Syphilol. 1937;36(3):486-493.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The title of this paper is somewhat presumptuous in that it implies that the intradermal chancroidal test is diagnostic. We wish to modify this premise, for if the evidence we are to present is to carry any weight, we must not attempt to prove all that the title infers.

1. This paper deals with two different intradermal tests so far as in one a pus antigen is used and in the second a bacillary antigen is employed.

2. This paper, in reality, is merely an evaluation of these two tests in the diagnosis of infection by the bacillus of Ducrey.

3. This paper attempts to prove the superiority of the test with bacillary antigen as advocated by us¹ over the test with pus antigen described by Cole and Levin.²

In the routine work of a special clinic organized at the University Hospital for the study of the so-called . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
AUGUSTA, GA.

From the Department of Pathology and the Department of Bacteriology and Public Health, University of Georgia School of Medicine.

Footnotes
Read before the Dugas Journal Club of the University of Georgia School of Medicine, Dec. 21, 1936.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?