Table 3.
Statistical significance of the comparisons of diagnostic accuracies (AUC) of different scenarios of the three tests applied separately or in combination on the whole cohort and divided by groups
| Compared scenarios | Comparison of AUC P-value (superior scenario) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Whole cohort | Active CE vs. liquid non-CE | Inactive CE vs. solid non-CE | |
| 1) IHA vs. 2) ELISA vs. 3)WB | 0.015 (3) | 0.171 | 0.081 |
| 1) IHA vs. 4) IHA+ELISA | 0.002 (1) | 0.103 | 0.005 (1) |
| 2) ELISA vs. 4) IHA+ELISA | 0.003 (2) | 0.207 | 0.005 (2) |
| 3) WB vs. 4) IHA+ELISA | < 0.001 (3) | 0.025 (3) | < 0.001 (3) |
| 1) IHA vs. 5) IHA and/or ELISA | 0.003 (5) | 0.207 | 0.005 (5) |
| 2) ELISA vs. 5) IHA and/or ELISA | 0.002 (5) | 0.103 | 0.005 (5) |
| 3) WB vs. 5) IHA and/or ELISA | 0.618 | 0.289 | 0.783 |
| 4) IHA+ELISA vs. 5) IHA and/or ELISA | < 0.001 (5) | 0.035 (5) | < 0.001 (5) |
| 3) WB vs. 6) IHA+ELISA; + WB if disc | 0.014 (3) | 0.370 | 0.010 (3) |
| 4) IHA+ELISA vs. 6) IHA+ELISA; + WB if disc | < 0.001 (6) | 0.020 (6) | 0.005 (6) |
| 3) WB vs. 7) IHA+ELISA; + WB if disc or negative | 0.276 | 0.207 | 1.000 |
| 5) IHA and/or ELISA vs. 7) IHA+ELISA; + WB if disc or negative | 0.361 | 0.024 (7) | 0.783 |
| 6) IHA+ELISA; + WB if disc vs. 7) IHA+ELISA; + WB if disc or negative | < 0.001 (7) | 0.039 (7) | 0.010 (7) |
AUC = area under the curve; CE = cystic echinococcosis; disc = discordant; IHA = indirect hemagglutination; WB = Western blot. Statistically significant differences are indicated in bold. The complete set of comparisons, including comparisons between sensitivities and specificities, is presented in the Web-only Supplemental Tables 1–3.