Skip to main content
. 2018 Aug 17;8:12339. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-30810-1

Table 3.

Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value at different CAD4TB score thresholds among individuals tested using Xpert MTB/RIF, visiting TB diagnostic and treatment centers in Karachi, Pakistan (Q3–2013 to Q2–2015).

CAD Score Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV Xpert tests saved Total Xpert tests TB Cases Missed MTB+ MTB Yield
No Triage Test
6,090 925 15.2%
Model 1: CAD4TB Only (AUC 0.79, 95% CI: 0.78–0.81)
50 97.3% 30.3% 20.0% 98.4% 1590 4500 25(2.7%) 900(97.3%) 20.0%
80 91.0% 50.7% 24.9% 96.9% 2702 3388 83(9.0%) 842(91.0%) 24.9%
90 85.0% 65.8% 30.8% 96.1% 3539 2551 139(15.0%) 786(85.0%) 30.8%
Model 2: CAD4TB, Symptoms (AUC 0.81, 95% CI: 0.79–0.82)
50 96.75% 30.37% 19.92% 98.12% 1601 4489 30 (3.2%) 894(96.8%) 19.9%
80 87.45% 61.40% 28.85% 96.47% 3289 2801 116(12.5%) 808(87.5%) 28.8%
90 73.05% 75.75% 35.03% 94.01% 4163 1927 249(26.9%) 675(73.1%) 35.0%
Model 3: CAD4TB, Age, Gender (AUC 0.83, 95% CI: 0.82–0.85)
50 96.3% 34.8% 20.9% 98.1% 1829 4261 34(3.7%) 891(96.3%) 20.9%
80 82.3% 66.9% 30.8% 95.5% 3620 2470 164(17.7%) 761(82.3%) 30.8%
90 65.8% 82.5% 40.2% 93.1% 4577 1513 316(34.2%) 609(65.8%) 40.2%
Model 4: CAD4TB, Age, Gender, Symptoms (AUC 0.84, 95% CI: 0.82–0.85)
50 95.8% 37.5% 21.5% 98.0% 1973 4117 39(4.2%) 886(95.8%) 21.5%
80 82.8% 68.5% 32.0% 95.7% 3695 2395 159(17.2%) 766(82.8%) 32.0%
90 69.1% 80.9% 39.3% 93.6% 4465 1625 286(30.9%) 639(69.1%) 39.3%