Skip to main content
. 2018 Dec 19;265:42–48. doi: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2018.12.013

Table 2.

Comparison of Respanel against Resplex I & II with 34 respiratory samples.

Organism TP FP TN FN Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) PPV (%) NPV (%) Accuracy (%)
Adenovirus 1 0 31 2 33 100 100 94 94
Human Metapneumovirus 1 0 33 0 100 100 100 100 100
Influenza A 2 6 26 0 100 81 25 100 82
Influenza B 0 0 34 0 100 100 100
Parainfluenza Virus 1 1 0 33 0 100 100 100 100 100
Parainfluenza Virus 2 2 1 31 0 100 97 67 100 97
Parainfluenza Virus 3 0 3 31 0 91 0 100 91
Respiratory Syncytial Virus 3 1 30 0 100 97 75 100 97
aEnterovirus/Rhinovirus 12 6 15 1 92 71 67 94 79
Bocavirus 6 2 26 0 100 93 75 100 94
Coronavirus 229E 0 0 34 0 100 100 100
Coronavirus OC43 2 0 32 0 100 100 100 100 100
Coronavirus NL63 1 1 32 0 100 97 50 100 97
Coronavirus HKU1 0 0 34 0 100 100 100
Mycoplasma pneumoniae 4 1 29 0 100 97 80 100 97
Streptococcus pneumoniae 10 5 19 0 100 79 67 100 85
Chlamydophila pneumoniae 0 1 33 0 97 0 100 97

TP = True positive, FP = False positive, TN = True negative, FN = False negative, PPV = Positive predictive value, NPV = Negative predictive value. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy were calculated as defined in the materials and methods (Section 2.6).

a

Enterovirus and Rhinovirus results were compared together because Resplex Enterovirus and Rhinovirus assays were reported in aggregate.