Skip to main content

Table 5 Summary of the diagnostic performances of all four clinical probability models

From: A comparative analysis of the diagnostic performances of four clinical probability models for acute pulmonary embolism in a sub-Saharan African population: a cross-sectional study

Models

Sensitivity (%)

(95% CI)

Specificity (%)

(95% CI)

Positive Predictive Value (%)

(95% CI)

Negative Predictive Value (%)

(95% CI)

Accuracy

(95% CI)

Wells score

56.3 (29.8—80.25)

64.3 (35.14—87.24)

64.3 (44.1—71.6)

56.3 (39.47—71.72)

60 (40.—77.3)

Simplified Wells score

62.5 (35.43—84.8)

50 (23.04—76.96)

58.8 (42.8—73.18)

53.8 (33.91—72.62)

37.43 (37.43—74.54)

Revised Geneva score

50 (24.65—75.35)

64.3 (35.14—87.24)

61.5 (40.45—79.03)

52.9 (37.55—67.79)

56.67 (37.43—74.54)

Simplified Revised Geneva score

50 (24.65—75.35)

71.4 (41.90—91.61)

66.7 (43.31—83.96)

55.5 (40.89—69.31)

60 (40.60—77.34)