Table 3.
Results From ROC Curve Analyses of Whether Villages Fall Below Thresholds of 25% Prevalence and 25 Mean EPG in Year 5 to Predict Prior Years, Means of Prior Years, or Changes in Prior Years
Prevalence | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Area Under the ROC Curve (%) | Threshold (%) | Sensitivity (95% CI) | Specificity (95% CI) |
1 | 84.56 | 67.38 | 86.36 (78.41–93.18) | 74.19 (62.90–83.91) |
2 | 84.45 | 53.83 | 85.53 (77.63–92.14) | 79.59 (67.35–89.80) |
3 | 95.10 | 43.71 | 89.06 (81.25–95.31) | 91.67 (80.56–100.00) |
4 | 97.37 | 41.73 | 96.15 (90.38–100.00) | 86.96 (73.91–100.00) |
5 | NA | 25.00 | NA | NA |
Mean of 1 and 2 | 87.22 | 58.69 | 85.84 (81.93–89.46) | 83.94 (78.76–89.12) |
Mean of 1, 2, and 3 | 92.73 | 54.08 | 88.46 (84.23–91.92) | 91.30 (86.09–95.65) |
Change at 2 (from 1) | 59.76 | −16.83 | 44.88 (39.46–50.00) | 76.68 (70.47–82.38) |
Change at 3 (from 1) | 78.40 | −16.27 | 69.93 (64.86–75.34) | 79.87 (73.38–86.36) |
Intensity | ||||
Year | Area Under the ROC Curve (%) | Threshold (EPG) | Sensitivity (95% CI) | Specificity (95% CI) |
1 | 86.38 | 113.43 | 92.00 (86.00–97.00) | 70.00 (56.00–82.00) |
2 | 82.46 | 67.91 | 88.10 (80.95–94.05) | 70.73 (56.10–85.37) |
3 | 90.03 | 64.67 | 91.67 (84.72–97.22) | 75.00 (57.14–89.29) |
4 | 86.65 | 37.26 | 91.07 (83.93–98.21) | 84.21 (68.42–100.00) |
5 | NA | 25.00 | NA | NA |
Mean of 1 and 2 | 84.40 | 71.00 | 84.62 (80.77–88.19) | 73.29 (66.46–79.50) |
Mean of 1, 2, and 3 | 86.00 | 104.11 | 94.64 (92.13–97.14) | 68.42 (58.95–76.84) |
Change at 2 (from 1) | 59.54 | −37.20 | 79.67 (75.27–83.79) | 49.07 (40.99–56.52) |
Change at 3 (from 1) | 59.28 | −72.39 | 89.02 (85.37–92.38) | 47.54 (38.52–56.56) |
The area under the ROC curve can be thought of as the expected percentage that a randomly drawn village below the year 5 threshold is less than a randomly drawn village that is above the threshold.
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; EPG, eggs per gram; NA, nonapplicable; ROC, receiving operating characteristic.