Limits...
Validating a decision tree for serious infection: diagnostic accuracy in acutely ill children in ambulatory care.

Verbakel JY, Lemiengre MB, De Burghgraeve T, De Sutter A, Aertgeerts B, Bullens DM, Shinkins B, Van den Bruel A, Buntinx F - BMJ Open (2015)

Bottom Line: Sensitivity of the decision tree was 100% (95% CI 71.5% to 100%) at a specificity of 83.6% (95% CI 82.3% to 84.9%) in the general practitioner setting with 17% of children testing positive.In the paediatric outpatient and emergency department setting, sensitivities were below 92%, with specificities below 44.8%.NCT02024282.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Validation results after applying optimised and pragmatic thresholds to the four-step decision tree. Yellow boxes, threshold changes after applying the optimisation using classification and regression tree analysis (CART); orange boxes, additional threshold changes after applying the pragmatic approach; sensitivity and specificity are given for every tree with their respective 95% CIs in brackets; y, years.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4538259&req=5

BMJOPEN2015008657F4: Validation results after applying optimised and pragmatic thresholds to the four-step decision tree. Yellow boxes, threshold changes after applying the optimisation using classification and regression tree analysis (CART); orange boxes, additional threshold changes after applying the pragmatic approach; sensitivity and specificity are given for every tree with their respective 95% CIs in brackets; y, years.

Mentions: FigureĀ 4 illustrates the threshold changes when (1) optimising the splits of the decision tree variables using CART, and (2) applying the pragmatic approach.


Validating a decision tree for serious infection: diagnostic accuracy in acutely ill children in ambulatory care.

Verbakel JY, Lemiengre MB, De Burghgraeve T, De Sutter A, Aertgeerts B, Bullens DM, Shinkins B, Van den Bruel A, Buntinx F - BMJ Open (2015)

Validation results after applying optimised and pragmatic thresholds to the four-step decision tree. Yellow boxes, threshold changes after applying the optimisation using classification and regression tree analysis (CART); orange boxes, additional threshold changes after applying the pragmatic approach; sensitivity and specificity are given for every tree with their respective 95% CIs in brackets; y, years.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4538259&req=5

BMJOPEN2015008657F4: Validation results after applying optimised and pragmatic thresholds to the four-step decision tree. Yellow boxes, threshold changes after applying the optimisation using classification and regression tree analysis (CART); orange boxes, additional threshold changes after applying the pragmatic approach; sensitivity and specificity are given for every tree with their respective 95% CIs in brackets; y, years.
Mentions: FigureĀ 4 illustrates the threshold changes when (1) optimising the splits of the decision tree variables using CART, and (2) applying the pragmatic approach.

Bottom Line: Sensitivity of the decision tree was 100% (95% CI 71.5% to 100%) at a specificity of 83.6% (95% CI 82.3% to 84.9%) in the general practitioner setting with 17% of children testing positive.In the paediatric outpatient and emergency department setting, sensitivities were below 92%, with specificities below 44.8%.NCT02024282.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus