Skip to main content
. 2015 Jan 18;17(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s13075-015-0517-5

Table 3.

Comparison of the performance of DETECT versus ESC/ERS versus ASIG screening models for pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients with systemic sclerosis

PAH prevalence set at 10% a
DETECT ESC/ERS ASIG DETECT ESC/ERS ASIG
n = 61 n = 58 n = 37 n = 61 n = 58 n = 37
Positive b 49 (80.3) 48 (82.8) 25 (67.6)
Negative b 12 (19.7) 10 (17.2) 12 (32.4)
True PAH on RHC c 27 (44.3) 27 (46.55) 15 (40.54)
Sensitivity 100% 96.3% 100% 100% 96.3% 100%
(95% CI) (87.2-100) (81.0-99.9) (78.2-100) (54.1-100) (54.1-100) (39.8-100)
Specificity 35.3% 32.3% 54.5% 35.3% 32.3% 54.5%
(95% CI) (19.7-53.5) (16.7-51.4) (32.2-75.6) (23.8-50.4) (15.6-41.0) (33.5-69.2)
PPV 55.1% 55.3% 60% 14.7% 13.6% 19.6%
(95% CI) (40.2-69.3) (40.1-69.8) (38.7-78.8) (5.6-29.2) (5.2-27.4) (5.7-43.7)
NPV 100% 90.9% 100% 100% 98.7% 100%
(95% CI) (63.1-100) (58.7-99.8) (73.5-100) (83.2-100) (76.8-100) (80.5-100)

aRefer to Additional file 1. bPositive or negative number screened by each of the algorithms. Values are presented as number (percentage). cTrue pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) number confirmed by right heart catheterization (RHC). Values are presented as number (percentage). ASIG, Australian Scleroderma Interest Group; CI, confidence interval; ESC/ERS, European Society of Cardiology/European Respiratory Society; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value.