Table 1.
Performance metrics of the AMR marker identification on ONT data, which is compared to the markers identified on the Illumina data (reference).
| Marker class | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | FNR | FPR | TP | FP | FN | TN | n |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ESBL | 78% | 95% | 70% | 5% | 30% | 79 | 29 | 4 | 69 | 181 |
| pAmpC | 96% | 70% | 91% | 30% | 9% | 16 | 0 | 7 | 158 | 181 |
| CP | 99% | 98% | 100% | 2% | 0% | 99 | 0 | 2 | 80 | 181 |
| KPC | 98% | 96% | 100% | 4% | 0% | 74 | 0 | 3 | 104 | 181 |
| MBL | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 15 | 0 | 0 | 166 | 181 |
| OXA-48 | 99% | 93% | 100% | 7% | 0% | 13 | 0 | 1 | 167 | 181 |
CA: Categorical agreement, FNR: False-negative rate, FPR: False-positive rate, TP: True positive, FP: False positive, FN: False negative, TN: True negative, and n: number of evaluated samples.