Table 5 Clinical performance of triplex real-time PCR and conventianal PCR
Virus | Triplex real-time PCR asssay | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TP a | FN | TN | FP | Tatal | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity(%) | Positive predictive value(%) | Negative predictive value(%) | |
AIV | 16 | 0 | 103 | 1 | 120 | 100.00 | 99.04 | 94.12 | 100.00 |
NDV | 6 | 0 | 113 | 1 | 120 | 100.00 | 99.13 | 85.71 | 100.00 |
DTMUV | 3 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 40 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
Virus | Conventional PCR methods | ||||||||
TPa | FN | TN | FP | Tatal | Sensitivity(%) | Specificity(%) | Positive predictive value(%) | Negative predictive value(%) | |
AIV | 13 | 3 | 99 | 5 | 120 | 81.25 | 95.19 | 72.22 | 97.06 |
NDV | 5 | 1 | 112 | 2 | 120 | 83.33 | 98.25 | 71.43 | 99.12 |
DTMUV | 3 | 0 | 37 | 0 | 40 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |