. 2019 Jul 3;8(7):968. doi: 10.3390/jcm8070968

Table 4.

Comparison results for each diagnostic test; CI, confidential interval; AUC, area under the curve; pAUC, partial area under the curve.

Comparison Results	Total (n = 8)			X-ray (n = 2)			CT (n = 2)			MRI (n = 4)			p-value^₭	post-hoc^₤
	Estimate	95% CI		Estimate	95% CI		Estimate	95% CI		Estimate	95% CI
	Estimate	Lower	Upper	Estimate	Lower	Upper	Estimate	Lower	Upper	Estimate	Lower	Upper
Heterogeneity Test, Higgins’ I2(p value) †	16.8% (p = 0.274)			0% (p = 0.897)			0% (p = 0.906)			0% (p = 0.592)
Sensitivity ^‡	0.745	0.592	0.854	0.528	0.380	0.672	0.669	0.506	0.800	0.929	0.837	0.971	0.004	X-ray = CT<MRI
Specificity ^‡	0.882	0.815	0.927	0.984	0.893	0.998	0.870	0.739	0.941	0.865	0.753	0.931		MRI=CT =X-ray
AUC ^₮	0.922	0.907	0.938	0.877	0.798	0.974	0.834	0.716	0.999	0.995	0.957	1.000
pAUC ^₮	0.817	0.783	0.854	N/A			0.678	0.463	0.997	0.988	0.898	1.000

^†p value by Cochran’s Q Test; ^‡ estimated by the bivariate model of HSROC; ^₭ Statistical test for evidence of a difference between groups by using F-test; ^₤ the bivariate-meta regression was performed and p value adjusted by Bonfferoni correction; ^₮ estimated by proportional hazard model approach.