Skip to main content

Table 5 Performance of subgroups of DBS PCR assays for screening cCMV

From: Dried blood spots PCR assays to screen congenital cytomegalovirus infection: a meta-analysis

a. Subgroup analysis of study design and diagnostic accuracy

Study Design

N

I2(%)

P

Pooled sensitivity (95% CI)

Pooled specificity (95% CI)

Pooled LR+ (95%CI)

Pooled LR- (95%CI)

DOR (95%CI)

Prospective

7

0.0

0.45

0.623 (0.548 - 0.693)

0.999 (0.999 - 1.000)

280.72 (60.026 - 1312.8)

0.374 (0.182 - 0.768)

1573.9 (699.17 - 3543.00)

Retrospective

8

64.0

0.01

0.945 (0.918 - 0.965)

0.983 (0.974 - 0.989)

43.831 (19.745 - 97.298)

0.043 (0.007 - 0.280)

1085.71 (229.94 - 5126.46)

b. Subgroup analysis of LOD and diagnostic accuracy

LOD

N

I2(%)

P

Pooled sensitivity (95% CI)

Pooled specificity (95% CI)

Pooled LR+ (95%CI)

Pooled LR- (95%CI)

DOR (95%CI)

High group

4

27.5

0.25

0.853 (0.773 - 0.914)

0.983 (0.960 - 0.994)

34.910 (16.013 - 76.015)

0.118 (0.009 - 1.596)

302.47 (44.653 - 2048.9)

Low group

5

19.4

0.29

0.612 (0.534 - 0.658)

1.000 (0.999 - 1.000)

554.64 (91.139 - 3375.4)

0.378 (0.166 - 0.862)

2428.5 (795.47 - 7413.9)

Others

6

61.1

0.0249

0.970 (0.945 - 0.986)

0.985 (0.978 - 0.990)

53.316 (21.532 - 132.013)

0.053 (0.011- 0.260)

1438.9 (300.50 - 6890.40)

c. Subgroup analysis of area of DBS and diagnostic accuracy

Diameter

N

I2(%)

P

Pooled sensitivity (95% CI)

Pooled specificity (95% CI)

Pooled LR+ (95%CI)

Pooled LR- (95%CI)

DOR (95%CI)

Large

5

44.3

0.13

0.861 (0.792 - 0.914)

0.999 (0.997 - 1.000)

103.91 (18.832 - 573.350)

0.116 (0.038 - 0.729)

1041.8 (151.62 - 7159.1)

Small

5

41.0

0.15

0.632 (0.557 - 0.702)

1.000 (0.999 - 1.000)

260.02 (40.310 - 1677.3)

0.295 (0.122 - 0.711)

1656.0 (421.89 - 6499.8)

Others

5

64

0.01

0.945 (0.918 - 0.965)

0.983 (0.974 - 0.989)

43.831 (19.745 - 97.298)

0.043 (0.007 - 0.280)

1085.71 (229.94 - 5126.46)

  1. a. Diagnostic performance of DBS PCR assays in study design subgroups. The sensitivity in retrospective studies was higher than that in prospective studies, 94.5% and 62.3% respectively. I 2 (64.0%) in subgroup of retrospective studies indicated that there was moderate heterogeneity. b. Diagnostic performance of DBS PCR assays in LOD subgroups. The test performance in low-LOD group was better than that in another two groups. The DOR were 2428.50 and 302.47 respectively. But the sensitivity in low-LOD subgroup (61.2%) was lower than that in high-LOD group (85.3%). c. Diagnostic performance of DBS PCR assays in area of DBS subgroups. The sensitivity of test in large area subgroup was better than that in small area subgroup, 86.1% and 63.2% respectively.
Back to article page

Virology Journal

ISSN: 1743-422X