Table 4.
Pearson's correlation and comparison of the ECVs for the SYO method obtained with different techniques
| Methods compared | R | % agreement for ECVs at indicated dilution |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ±1 dilution | ±2 dilutions | >2 dilutions | ||
| CLSI vs median | 0.99 | 60.9 | 95.7 | POS for C. tropicalis |
| CLSI vs clustering | 0.89 | 56.5 | 78.3 | ITR and POS for C. albicans; FZ, VOR, and POS for C. tropicalis |
| CLSI vs Turnidge et al. | 0.94 | 43.5 | 95.7 | POS for C. tropicalis |
| CLSI vs Kronvall | 0.99 | 23.1 | 56.5 | FZ for C. albicans, C. parapsilosis, C. tropicalis, and C. orthopsilosis; ITR and POS for C. albicans and C. tropicalis; VOR for C. tropicalis and C. orthopsilosis |
| CLSI vs mode | 0.97 | 86.95 | 95.7 | POS for C. tropicalis |
| CLSI vs MIC50 | 0.94 | 82.7 | 95.7 | POS for C. tropicalis |
| Median vs clustering | 0.89 | 87.5 | 95.8 | FZ for C. tropicalis |
| Median vs Turnidge et al. | 0.94 | 100 | ||
| Median vs Kronvall | 0.99 | 62.5 | 87.5 | VOR for C. tropicalis and C. orthopsilosis; FZ for C. orthopsilosis |
| Median vs mode | 0.97 | 100 | ||
| Median vs MIC50 | 0.94 | 91.7 | 100 | |
| Clustering vs Turnidge et al. | 0.95 | 75 | 95.8 | FZ for C. tropicalis |
| Clustering vs Kronvall | 0.91 | 70.8 | 87.5 | VOR for C. parapsilosis and C. orthopsilosis |
| Clustering vs mode | 0.8 | 70.8 | 87.5 | FZ and VOR for C. tropicalis |
| Clustering vs MIC50 | 0.73 | 66.6 | 91.6 | FZ for C. tropicalis; ITR for C. albicans |
| Turnidge vs Kronvall | 0.94 | 70.8 | 91.6 | VOR for C. tropicalis and C. orthopsilosis |
| Turnidge vs mode | 0.84 | 100 | ||
| Turnidge vs MIC50 | 0.77 | 83.3 | 100 | |
| Kronvall vs mode | 0.97 | 45.8 | 79.2 | FZ, ITR, and VOR for C. tropicalis; VOR for C. orthopsilosis |
| Kronvall vs MIC50 | 0.93 | 29.2 | 79.2 | FZ, ITR, and VOR for C. tropicalis; FZ and VOR for C. orthopsilosis |
| Mode vs MIC50 | 0.99 | 100 | ||