Fig 1.
Flow chart of subject disposition for the THAI-LEPTO score study in development cohort (A) and validation cohort comparing between THAI-LEPTO score and IgM rapid test (B).
aDevelopment cohort in 11 centers during 2012 to 2014. bValidation cohort in 4 centers during 2015 to 2016.cSimplified THAI-LEPTO score model II (7 variables) with cutoff value of 4 was used in the validation analysis.
Table 1.
Patients’ clinical and laboratory characteristics (on admission) of confirmed-leptospirosis and non-leptospirosis group in development cohort (n = 211).
Fig 2.
Forest plots of unadjusted (A) and adjusted (B) odds ratio in clinical prediction of leptospirosis, comparing with IgM rapid test in development cohort.
Table 2.
Creating the THAI-LEPTO score of development cohort with multivariable regression-based method (n = 211).
Fig 3.
The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for predicting leptospirosis in each model of THAI-LEPTO scores, comparing with IgM rapid test (A) and according to fever days of simplified model (B) in development cohort study.
AUC; area under ROC curve
Table 3.
THAI-LEPTO score of the development cohort at the best cutoff value to predict leptospirosis in suspected cases, comparing with IgM rapid test (n = 211).
Fig 4.
The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for predicting leptospirosis of simplified THAI-LEPTO score model II (7 variable), comparing with IgM rapid test in validation study.
AUC; area under ROC curve.
Table 4.
Accuracy of the simplified THAI-LEPTO score comparing with IgM rapid test in validation cohort analysis (n = 92).
Table 5.
Performance of available diagnostic score models of leptospirosis.