Volume 24, Number 2—February 2018
Research
Development of a Pediatric Ebola Predictive Score, Sierra Leone1
Table 4
Comparison of 2 different PEP scores on a hypothetical population of 100 suspected EVD patients at different points in EVD outbreak with differing prevalence of EVD*
PEP score |
October 2014, 77% of suspected EVD+ cases† | March 2015, 4% of suspected EVD+ cases† | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
True EVD+,
correctly admitted |
True EVD–, correctly
not admitted |
False
EVD+, unnecessarily
admitted |
False
EVD–, incorrectly not admitted |
True EVD+, correctly admitted |
True EVD–, correctly
not admitted |
False
EVD+, unnecessarily
admitted |
False EVD–, incorrectly not admitted |
||
3: 94% sensitivity, 30% specificity | 72 | 7 | 16 | 5 | 4 | 28 | 68 | 0 | |
7: 44% sensitivity, 92% specificity | 34 | 21 | 2 | 43 | 2 | 88 | 8 | 2 |
*Laboratory-confirmed EVD status figures from Connaught Hospital (Freetown, Sierra Leone) during the 2014–2015 outbreak. EVD, Ebola virus disease; PEP, pediatric Ebola predictive; +, positive; –, negative.
†True or false EVD+ or EVD– determined by case ascertainment by PEP score. Admission result represents modeled outcome for patients in terms of Ebola holding unit.
1Preliminary results from this study were presented at the 26th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam, Netherlands, April 9–12, 2016; and the 34th Annual Meeting of the European Society for Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Brighton, UK, May 10–14, 2016.
2These authors contributed equally to this article.