Table 3.
Performance characteristics of two different methods compared to Giemsa stain microscopy
| Test methods | ||
|---|---|---|
| PT | BN RDT | |
| Sensitivity | 100 | 97.2 |
| (95% CI) | (96.6-100) | (92.0-99.4) |
| Specificity | 97.4 | 93.6 |
| (95% CI) | (93.6-99.3) | (88.5-96.9) |
| PPV1 | 96.4 | 91.2 |
| (95% CI) | (91.0-99.0) | (84.5-95.7) |
| NPV2 | 100 | 98 |
| (95% CI) | (97.6-100) | (94.2-99.6) |
| PLR3 | 39 | 15.2 |
| (95% CI) | (14.8-103.0) | (8.3-27.6) |
| NLR4 | 0 | 0 |
| (95% CI) | (0.0-0.0) | (0.0-0.9) |
| kappa | 0.97 | 0.9 |
| Std Error | 0.06 | 0.06 |
| p value | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
1 PPV: Positive predictive value 2 NPV: Negative predictive value
3 PLR: Positive likelihood ratio 4 NLR: Negative likelihood ratio