Table 6.
Diagnostic test performance of MT PCR and HRM analysis
| Outcome | Median (95% PI) a |
|---|---|
| MT PCR | |
| Diagnostic sensitivity (%) | 98.9 (97.0, 99.8) |
| Diagnostic specificity (%) | 97.8 (94.5, 99.3) |
| PCR-HRM analysis | |
| Diagnostic sensitivity (%) | 97.6 (95.6, 99.0) |
| Diagnostic specificity (%) | 96.5 (94.3, 98.3) |
| Estimated true prevalence | |
| Group 1 (%) | 98.2 (95.5, 99.6) |
| Group 2 (%) | 0 (0, 2.14) |
| Agreement between tests | |
| PABAK in group 1 | 95.2 (90.2, 98.0) |
| PABAK in group 2 | 94.0 (87.3, 97.9) |
| Conditional dependence between tests b | |
| ρ+ | 0.301 (0.006, 0.715) |
| ρ- | 0.480 (0.106, 0.772) |
| Model fit | |
| pD | 12.8 |
| DIC | 35.1 |
The diagnostic sensitivity of the MT PCR was defined based on a cut-off of ≥ 1 DNA copies.
aPI, probability interval.
b ρ+ is the conditional correlation between MT PCR and PCR-HRM outcomes for infected animals, and ρ- is the conditional correlation for uninfected animals.
PABAK = prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted Cohen’s kappa (ĸ) statistic.
pD = effective dimension (model complexity).
DIC = Deviance information criterion, a generalisation of Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC).