The Korean Journal of Clinical Laboratory Science : eISSN 2288-1662 / pISSN 1738-3544

Table. 3.

Table. 3.

Comparison evaluation methods of diagnostic method by reported paper

Test Assay Population (yr) Comparison method Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%) References
2nd-generation point of care test 3M rapid detection RSV All ages Composite standard: cell culture and DFA 86.3 95.8 [27]
BD Veritor system <6 Prodesse ProFluļ¼‹RT-PCR 81.6 99.1 [28]
RSV K-SeT antigen test <6 Laboratory-developed RT-PCR 79.1 95.8 [29]
Sofia <18 Traditional cell culture 87.7 94.7 [30]
Sofia POC Not defined RT-PCR 85 97 [31]
Rapid molecular test Cepheid Xpert Flu/RSV Not defined Laboratory-developed RT-PCR 97.9 100 [32]
Cepheid Xpert Flu/RSV Not defined Laboratory-developed RT-PCR 90.6 99.4 [33]
Sofia RSV FIA Not defined RT-qPCR 80.8 98.7 [34]
Multiplex molecular test AdvanSure Not defined Composite reference 96.8 100 [35]
Seeplex RV15 ACE Not defined Composite reference 94.7 100 [35]
ResPlex II Panel v2.0 0∼17 Composite reference 84.0 100 [36]
Seeplex RV15 0∼17 Composite reference 100 97.7 [36]
xTAG RVP 0∼17 Composite reference 88.2 100 [36]
xTAG RVP Fast 0∼17 Composite reference 91.7 100 [36]
xTAG RVP Fast 0∼84 Laboratory-developed real-time RT-PCR 94.7 99.2 [37]
Simplexa FluA/B and RSV Adult patients Laboratory-developed RT-PCR 91.3 98.9 [38]
Korean J Clin Lab Sci 2021;53:11-8 https://doi.org/10.15324/kjcls.2021.53.1.11
© 2021 Korean J Clin Lab Sci