Table 2.
Accuracy of TriVerity Bacterial score for the diagnosis of bacterial and viral infections
| (a) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TriVerity Bacterial band (score) | Clinically adjudicated bacterial infection1 | Sensitivity (%) |
Specificity (%) |
Likelihood ratio (80% CI) |
Relative requency of result (% in band) | Probability of bacterial infection (%) |
|
| Yes (N) |
No (N) |
||||||
|
Very High (40–50) |
165 | 12 | 35.9 | 95.5 |
8.04 (5.66–12.43) |
24.3 | 93.2 |
|
High (30–39) |
107 | 25 | 23.3 | 90.7 |
2.50 (1.97–3.31) |
18.1 | 81.1 |
|
Moderate (21–29) |
90 | 46 | 19.6 | 82.9 |
1.14 (0.94–1.42) |
18.7 | 66.2 |
|
Low (11–20) |
85 | 92 | 81.5 | 34.2 |
0.54 (0.45–0.63) |
24.3 | 48 |
|
Very Low (0-10) |
13 | 94 | 97.2 | 34.9 |
0.08 (0.05–0.11) |
14.7 | 12.1 |
| (b) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TriVerity Viral band (score) | Clinically adjudicated viral infection1 | Sensitivity (%) |
Specificity (%) |
Likelihood ratio (80% CI) |
Relative frequency of result (% in band) |
Probability of viral infection (%) | |
| Yes (N) |
No (N) |
||||||
|
Very High (40–50) |
105 | 8 | 59.3 | 98.6 |
40.93 (27.73–72.16) |
15.5 | 92.9 |
|
High (30–39) |
25 | 33 | 14.1 | 94.0 |
2.36 (1.68–3.25) |
8 | 43.1 |
|
Moderate 21–29) |
22 | 79 | 12.4 | 85.7 |
0.87 (0.64–1.13) |
13.9 | 21.8 |
|
Low (11–20) |
17 | 166 | 90.4 | 30.1 |
0.32 (0.22–0.41) |
25.1 | 9.3 |
|
Very Low (0–10) |
8 | 266 | 95.5 | 48.2 |
0.09 (0.05–0.14) |
37.6 | 2.9 |
1using consensus adjudication as the reference standard.