Open Access
Research Article

Table 1

Comparative performances between routine procedure and the Novodiag® Stool Parasites assay on the prospective cohort (n = 249 samples).

Parasite of interest Diagnostic strategy Positive samples (n=) Negative samples (n=) False-positive samples* (n=) False-negative samples* (n=) Se (%) Sp (%)
Blastocystis spp. Routine 27 206 NA 16 62.8 NA
Novodiag® 43 190 16 0 100 92.2
Dientamoeba fragilis Routine 0 239 NA 10 0 NA
Novodiag® 10 239 0 0 100 100
Giardia intestinalis Routine 2 247 NA 0 100 NA
Novodiag® 1 243 4 1 50 98.4
Cryptosporidium spp. Routine 1 248 NA 0 100 NA
Novodiag® 1 248 0 0 100 100
Schistosoma spp.a Routine 1 243 NA 5 16.7 NA
Novodiag® 6 243 0 0 100 100
Taenia saginata Routine 1 248 NA 0 100 NA
Novodiag® 1 248 0 0 100 100
Enterobius vermicularis Routine 2 246 NA 1 66.7 NA
Novodiag® 3 246 0 0 100 100
Trichuris spp. Routine 1 248 NA 0 100 NA
Novodiag® 0 241 7 1 0 97.2
Enterocytozoon bieneusi Routine 6 243 NA 0 100 NA
Novodiag® 6 243 0 0 100 100

NA: Not appropriate as routine procedure was considered the reference method (i.e., samples positive by RP were considered true positive).

*

False-negative or false-positive were determined based on external PCR investigations.

a

Except one identified to the genus level (Schistosoma spp.) all remaining Schistosoma-positive samples were identified as S. mansoni by the NVD and RP.

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.