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

Table 1.

Summary of characteristics of calprotectin home tests and companion ELISAs.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Study flow.

We used 40 stool samples that covered the whole range of potential calprotectin values and performed 1440 smartphone readings and 120 ELISA measurements.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 2.

Agreement of results between three different home test and corresponding ELISA using Bland-Altman plot analysis.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Bland-Altman plots showing difference against mean for (A) IBDoc vs. fCAL; (B) QuantOn Cal vs. IDK Calprotectin; and (C) CalproSmart vs. Calprotectin (ALP).

The grey zone corresponds with the predefined acceptable limits of difference, which were arbitrary set at ±100 μg/g for the lower range and at ±200 μg/g for the higher range.[7] The dotted line is the bias (mean of the differences), the dashed lines are the upper and lower 95% limits of agreement (LOA).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Histogram of differences in calprotectin concentrations (μg/g) for (A) IBDoc minus fCAL; (B) QuantOn Cal minus IDK Calprotectin; and (C) CalproSmart minus Calprotectin (ALP).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Simplified concordance matrices showing calprotectin readings with (A) IBDoc against fCAL; (B) QuantOn Cal against IDK Calprotectin; and (C) CalproSmart against Calprotectin (ALP).

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Reading error rate per home test for different smartphone types.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Student’s mean system usability scale (SUS) scores on day 1, 7 and day 10 of testing.

SUS scores above 90 should be converted to “A”; 80–90 to “B”; 70–80 to “C”; 60–70 to “D”; and below 60 to “F”.

More »

Fig 6 Expand