TABLE 5.
Performance scores for quantitative results
| Performance score | No. of resultsa
|
|||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Panel 1
|
Panel 2
|
|||||||||
| Roche (n = 16) | Digene (n = 13)b | Other (n = 6)c | All (n = 35)d | Roche (n = 20) | Digene I (n = 3) | Digene II (n = 10) | Digene U (n = 5) | Other (n = 9)e | All (n = 47)d | |
| Good, 6 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 (29) | 9 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 10 (21) |
| Adequate, 5 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 10 (29) | 5 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 10 (21) |
| Mediocre, 4 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 12 (34) | 4 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 12 (26) |
| Poor, <4 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 (8) | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 8 | 15 (32) |
a
For panel 1, the percentage of results with scores of good plus adequate was 57%. For panel 2, the percentage of results with scores of good plus adequate was 42%.
b
Digene I and Digene II considered together.
c
In-house nested PCR (n = 2), in-house PCR (n = 1), Bayer bDNA (n = 2), and BAG AcuGen (n = 1).
d
Values in parentheses are percentages.
e
Bayer bDNA (n = 5), in-house PCR (n = 3), and BAG AcuGen (n = 1).