Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 13;43(1):20–31. doi: 10.1080/0886022X.2020.1853568

Table 3.

Subgroup analysis of the included studies.

  N Sensitivity (95% CI) I2 (%) Specificity (95% CI) I2 (%) PLR (95% CI) I2 (%) NLR (95% CI) I2 (%) DOR (95% CI) I2 (%) AUC
rSLEDAI score                        
> 0 4 0.66 (0.57–0.75) 65.1 0.77 (0.68–0.84) 88.8 3.80 (1.29–11.22) 82.8 0.44 (0.35–0.57) 4.1 8.90 (3.79–20.98) 29.6 0.79
> 4 3 0.85 (0.76–0.91) 80.4 0.74 (0.61–0.84) 68.3 3.39 (1.59–7.22) 61.2 0.20 (0.08–0.55) 62.6 19.00 (6.38–56.55) 7.7 0.90
Sample type                        
Urine 7 0.67 (0.60–0.73) 87.3 0.83 (0.77–0.89) 63.2 3.71 (2.33–5.91) 38.0 0.38 (0.25–0.60) 77.3 12.40 (6.65–23.13) 0 0.86
Serum 2 0.81 (0.67–0.91) 0 0.57 (0.42–0.70) 79.8 2.21 (0.84–5.84) 69.8 0.33 (0.18–0.63) 0 6.56 (1.73–24.94) 42.6 NA

rSLEDAI: renal systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index; N: number of studies; CI: confidence interval; PLR: positive likelihood ratio; NLR: negative likelihood ratio; DOR: diagnostic odds ratio; AUC: area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; NA: not available.