Table 2.
Pooled sensitivity and specificity of Schistosoma mansoni and Schistosoma haematobium diagnostic tests
| Test comparisons | Participants | Perfect reference test assumption |
Imperfect reference test assumption |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | |||
| S mansoni | ||||||
| CCA1 vs duplicate Kato-Katz | 17 | 4884 | 59% (45–72) | 85% (74–93) | 76% (60–88) | 95% (88–99) |
| CCA1 vs quadruple Kato-Katz | 10 | 4215 | 60% (45–74) | 86% (76–93) | 74% (59–88) | 96% (90–99) |
| CCA1 vs sextuple Kato-Katz | 7 | 2325 | 68% (55–79) | 83% (71–92) | 78% (62–95) | 92% (76–99) |
| CCA1 vs Kato-Katz (all) | 36 | 11 858 | 61% (51–70) | 87% (81–91) | 74% (63–83) | 95% (88–99) |
| CAA vs duplicate Kato-Katz | 3 | 830 | 67% (3–100) | 61% (02–99) | 95% (91–98)∗ | 90% (86–93)∗ |
| SmCTF-RDT vs quadruple Kato-Katz | 4 | 291 | 35% (14–63) | 86% (30–100) | 39% (11–70) | 83% (33–99) |
| IgG ELISA vs triplicate Kato-Katz | 3 | 844 | 80% (12–100) | 95% (83–99) | 98% (96–100)∗ | 99% (97–100)∗ |
| AWE-SEA Elisa vs Kato-Katz | 2 | 147 | 68% (19–97) | 88% (44–100) | 68% (57–79)∗ | 93% (81–100)∗ |
| SWAP Elisa vs Kato-Katz | 2 | 522 | 70% (12–99) | 89% (53–99) | 69% (61–80)∗ | 97% (92–100)∗ |
| PCR vs Kato-Katz | 5 | 652 | 80% (50–95) | 92% (48–100) | 87% (62–99) | 97% (84–100) |
| rtPCR vs Kato-Katz | 5 | 811 | 72% (4–100) | 95% (86–99) | 79% (20–100) | 92% (17–100) |
| LAMP vs Kato-Katz | 2 | 545 | 86% (1–100) | 93% (62–100) | 90% (86–93)∗ | 99% (96–100)∗ |
| S haematobium | ||||||
| CCA1 vs urine filtration | 4 | 991 | 74% (28–97) | 51% (11–90) | 81% (47–98) | 68% (29–95) |
| CAA vs urine filtration | 4 | 1247 | 79% (14–100) | 71% (20–98) | 83% (25–100) | 81% (24–99) |
| Proteinuria vs urine filtration | 42 | 79 756 | 82% (75–88) | 59% (50–67) | 94% (89–98) | 73% (62–82) |
| Haematuria vs urine filtration | 75 | 174 199 | 87% (84–90) | 75% (70–80) | 96% (92–99) | 85% (80–90) |
| Leukocyturia vs urine filtration | 5 | 1532 | 60% (25–88) | 56% (34–76) | 69% (27–96) | 60% (38–81) |
| IgG SEA ELISA vs urine filtration | 5 | 793 | 77% (43–96) | 89% (77–96) | 88% (47–100) | 94% (72–100) |
| LAMP vs urine filtration | 3 | 335 | 64% (20–94) | 86% (46–100) | 92% (80–100)∗ | 93% (87–99)∗ |
Data are n, sensitivity (95% credible interval), or specificity (95% credible interval). AWE=S mansoni adult worm extract. CAA=circulating anodic antigen serum and urine assay. CCA1=circulating cathodic antigen urine cassette assay version 1. CCA2=circulating cathodic antigen urine cassette assay version 2. LAMP=loop-mediated isothermal amplification. RDT=rapid diagnostic test. rtPCR=real-time PCR. SEA=S mansoni soluble egg antigen. SmCTF=S mansoni cercarial transformation fluid. SWAP=soluble adult worm antigen preparation.
∗
Sensitivity and specificity were assumed constant across studies when the number of comparisons was less than four.