Goddard D H, Moore M E
Einstein-Moss Arthritis, Philadelphia, PA 19141.
Arthritis Rheum. 1988 Mar;31(3):432-5. doi: 10.1002/art.1780310317.
Rheumatoid factor (RF) test results reported in the College of American Pathologists' surveys for 1983-1985 lacked inter-laboratory reliability and mutual validity. Using the 4 most popular commercial kits for RF testing, participating laboratories consistently identified as "positive" or "negative" all but the weakly positive samples. A wide range of titers was reported on qualitative testing, however. One popular kit using a modified sheep red blood cell agglutination technique yielded results that differed markedly from those with other kits. Investigators apparently have paid little attention to these discrepancies. In Arthritis & Rheumatism, from 1983 to 1985, over 50% of the articles that referred directly or indirectly to RFs omitted details of RF methodology. Until a reliable RF test is adopted, it is essential that such methodologic information be specified.
美国病理学家学会1983 - 1985年调查中报告的类风湿因子（RF）检测结果缺乏实验室间的可靠性和相互有效性。使用4种最常用的商业化RF检测试剂盒时，参与调查的实验室除弱阳性样本外，对所有样本都一致判定为“阳性”或“阴性”。然而，定性检测报告的滴度范围很广。一种采用改良绵羊红细胞凝集技术的常用试剂盒得出的结果与其他试剂盒的结果明显不同。显然，研究人员很少关注这些差异。在1983年至1985年的《关节炎与风湿病》杂志上，超过50%直接或间接提及RF的文章省略了RF检测方法的细节。在采用可靠的RF检测方法之前，明确此类方法学信息至关重要。
