Table 3.
RDT performances against rIFA.
| SN (95CI) % | SP (95CI) % | PPV (95CI) % | NPV (95CI) % | LR+ (95CI) % | LR- (95CI) % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All cases (n = 91) versus rIFA |
RDT-A WB | 92 (78–98) | 100 (91–100) | 100 (88–100) | 95 (84–99) | ∞ | 0.08 (0.03–0.23) |
| RDT-A plasma | 95 (81–99) | 100 (91–100) | 100 (88–100) | 96 (86–99) | ∞ | 0.05 (0.01–0.20) | |
| RDT-B WB | 87 (72–95) | 98 (88–100) | 97 (83–100) | 91 (80–97) | 45.33 (6.48–316.97) | 0.13 (0.06–0.30) | |
| RDT-B plasma | 97 (85–100) | 98 (88–100) | 97 (85–100) | 98 (88–100) | 50.67 (7.27–353.17) | 0.03 (0.00–0.18) | |
| RDT-C WB | 100 (88–100) | 98 (88–100) | 98 (85–100) | 100 (92–100) | 52.00 (7.46–362.23) | 0.00 | |
| RDT-C plasma | 100 (88–100) | 98 (88–100) | 98 (85–100) | 100 (92–100) | 52.00 (7.46–362.23) | 0.00 | |
| DPD 0-14 and controls (n = 64) versus rIFA a | RDT-A | 92 (62–100) | 100 (91–100) | 100 (70–100) | 98 (88–100) | ∞ | 0.08 (0.01–0.51) |
| RDT-B | 92 (62–100) | 98 (88–99) | 92 (62–100) | 98 (88–100) | 47.08 (6.72–329.89) | 0.08 (0.01–0.52) | |
| RDT-C | 100 (72–100) | 98 (88–100) | 93 (64–100) | 100 (91–100) | 51.00 (7.32–355.13) | 0.00 | |
| DPD > 14 and controls (n = 77) versus rIFA a | RDT-A | 93 (74–99) | 100 (91–100) | 100 (83–100) | 96 (86-99) | ∞ | 0.07 (0.02–0.28) |
| RDT-B | 85 (65–95) | 100 (91–100) | 100 (82–100) | 93 (81-98) | ∞ | 0.15 (0.06–0.37) | |
| RDT-C | 100 (85–100) | 100 (91–100) | 100 (85–100) | 100 (91-100) | ∞ | 0.00 | |
a Only whole-blood (WB) samples were analyzed in the DPD sub-analysis. DPD, days post-diagnosis; Sn, sentivity; Sp, specificity; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predicitve value; LR+, positive likelihood ratio; LR-, negative likelihood ratio; RDT-A, NTBIO; RDT-B, Orient-Gene, RDT-C, MEDsan Rapid Diagnostic Test; rIFA, recombinant immunofluorescence assay; and ∞, infinite.