Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flowchart of the study population.

In all 894 individuals who underwent RT-PCR testing (reference standard) were screened as potential eligible participants. Among them 207 were excluded because of missing files. So 687 were included in the study: 220 had negative RT-PCR and 467 had positive RT-PCR. Among the 220 individuals with negative RT-PCR, 14 had missing data for the score, 145 were classified as negative by both the score and the RT-PCR (true negative), and 61 were classified as positive by the score while being negative with the RT-PCR (false positive). Among the 467 individuals with positive RT-PCR, 10 had missing data for the score, 396 were classified as positive by both the score and the RT-PCR (true positive), and 61 were classified as negative by the score while being positive with the RT-PCR (false negative).

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of subjects with suspected Chikungunya virus infection.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Bivariable and multivariable analyses of predictors of CHIK+ status using logistic regression, and the corresponding weighted point values of the score.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Receiver operating characteristic of the screening score for Chikungunya virus infection.

The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve is a plot of the true positive rate (Sensitivity) against the false positive rate (1-Specificity). The cut-off value represents the point on the curve that maximizes both sensitivity and specificity. In this analysis, the cut-off value identified to best distinguish between CHIK+ and CHIK- patients was 12 points (★).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 3.

Diagnostic performances of the score dichotomised at 12 points*.

More »

Table 3 Expand