{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]],"date-time":"2026-07-08T13:23:19Z","timestamp":1783516999660,"version":"3.55.0"},"reference-count":23,"publisher":"American Society for Microbiology","issue":"7","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]],"date-time":"2026-07-08T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1783468800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]],"date-time":"2026-07-08T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1783468800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/non-commercial-tdm-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.asm.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["J Clin Microbiol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>ABSTRACT<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title\/>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Three enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) were evaluated on two platforms each for detecting\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Cryptosporidium<\/jats:italic>\n                      ,\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Giardia<\/jats:italic>\n                      , and\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Campylobacter<\/jats:italic>\n                      in stool samples compared to reference methods. The\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Cryptosporidium<\/jats:italic>\n                      EIAs run on stool specimens in three preservative media showed 100% agreement with direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) testing and high correlation with the microscopic method. The\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Giardia<\/jats:italic>\n                      EIAs demonstrated 100% concordance for positive, but only moderate overall correlation with the microscopic method. The\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Campylobacter<\/jats:italic>\n                      EIAs had 93.5% sensitivity (out of 65 positives) and 100% specificity compared to the culture method. Automation on a DS2 system for these three EIAs, along with five others, yielded acceptable performance (92.5\u2013100% accuracy, 100% precision) compared to manual methods. The automation saved labor time and improved operational efficiency, but may not be cost-effective for low-volume runs due to the labor required for automation not scaling proportionally with sample numbers. In conclusion, EIAs are preferred for detecting protozoan parasites in stool, with the\n                      <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Cryptosporidium<\/jats:italic>\n                      EIA showing potential as a semi-quantitative assay and a reference method. Automation benefits high-throughput laboratories, but may not be as advantageous for low-volume laboratories.\n                    <\/jats:p>\n                    <jats:sec>\n                      <jats:title>IMPORTANCE<\/jats:title>\n                      <jats:p>\n                        Enzyme immunoassay (EIA) is a widely used method in clinical laboratories to detect pathogens in stool samples related to diarrhea diseases. This study evaluated the performance of three EIAs for detecting\n                        <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Cryptosporidium<\/jats:italic>\n                        ,\n                        <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Giardia<\/jats:italic>\n                        , and\n                        <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Campylobacter<\/jats:italic>\n                        antigens compared to their gold standard methods. The\n                        <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Cryptosporidium<\/jats:italic>\n                        EIAs matched the direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) testing and had a high correlation with microscopic findings (99.7%). The\n                        <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Giardia<\/jats:italic>\n                        EIAs showed 100% concordance for positive but lower specificity (58%) and moderate correlation with microscopic results (87.4%). The\n                        <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">Campylobacter<\/jats:italic>\n                        EIA had 93.5% sensitivity (\n                        <jats:italic toggle=\"yes\">n<\/jats:italic>\n                        = 65 positive samples) with few discrepancies. Automating these three and five other EIAs using a DS2 system (Dynex) yielded good accuracy (92.5\u2013100%) and 100% precision compared to manual methods. While automation saved hands-on time for high-volume assays, it may not be cost-effective for low-volume laboratories.\n                      <\/jats:p>\n                    <\/jats:sec>\n                  <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1128\/jcm.00006-26","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,12]],"date-time":"2026-06-12T13:00:22Z","timestamp":1781269222000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1128\/asmj-crossmark-policy-page","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Stool antigen-based enzyme immunoassays: performance evaluations and automation"],"prefix":"10.1128","volume":"64","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-6883-1036","authenticated-orcid":true,"given":"Jian R.","family":"Bao","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Quest Diagnostics Inc","place":["Chantilly, USA"]}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Robert S.","family":"Jones","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Quest Diagnostics Inc","place":["Chantilly, USA"]}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"235","reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_3_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMra1301069"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10620-021-07330-6"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3390\/tropicalmed7100253"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/JCM.02877-13"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/JCM.41.2.623-626.2003"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.mimet.2022.106657"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1155\/2009\/547090"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10096-019-03499-x"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_10_2","unstructured":"CDC. 2024. Laboratory diagnosis of cryptosporidiosis Cryptosporidium spp. Available from: https:\/\/www.cdc.gov\/dpdx\/resources\/pdf\/benchaids\/crypto_benchaid.pdf"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/PAT.0000000000000233"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4049\/jimmunol.109.1.129"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fawpar.2021.e00131"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3390\/diagnostics12020508"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s40475-015-0055-x"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_16_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1373\/clinchem.2005.051532"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_17_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/mi.2013.50"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_18_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.4269\/ajtmh.19-0792"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1139\/w04-059"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/JCM.01489-10"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_21_2","first-page":"993","article-title":"Rapid and sensitive detection of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli directly from stool samples by real-time PCR in comparison to culture, enzyme immunoassay and Vero cell cytotoxicity assay","volume":"57","author":"Gerritzen A","year":"2011","unstructured":"Gerritzen A, Wittke JW, Wolff D. 2011. Rapid and sensitive detection of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli directly from stool samples by real-time PCR in comparison to culture, enzyme immunoassay and Vero cell cytotoxicity assay. Clin Lab 57:993\u2013998.","journal-title":"Clin Lab"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF02447929"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_23_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s13099-021-00400-0"},{"key":"e_1_3_3_24_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/CMR.00025-17"}],"container-title":["Journal of Clinical Microbiology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/doi\/pdf\/10.1128\/jcm.00006-26","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/doi\/pdf\/10.1128\/jcm.00006-26","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]],"date-time":"2026-07-08T13:01:05Z","timestamp":1783515665000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/doi\/10.1128\/jcm.00006-26"}},"subtitle":[],"editor":[{"given":"Bobbi S.","family":"Pritt","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"editor"}]}],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]]},"references-count":23,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1128\/jcm.00006-26"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1128\/jcm.00006-26","relation":{},"ISSN":["0095-1137","1098-660X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0095-1137","type":"print"},{"value":"1098-660X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,8]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2026-01-02","order":0,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2026-05-09","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2026-06-12","order":3,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}],"article-number":"e00006-26"}}