Comparison of the fluorescence microscopy Cyscope® with light microscopy for malaria diagnosis in a small and active surveillance in Cameroon

Table 4 Diagnostic performances of Cyscope® FM with regard to clinical status

Parameters	All (n = 441)		Febrile (n = 56)		Afebrile (n = 385)		P value
Parameters	Value	95% CI	Value	95% CI	Value	95% CI	P value
Se (%)	84.00	74.08–90.60	57.14	25.04–84.18	86.76	76.71–92.87	0.74
Sp (%)	69.95	65.07–74.42	65.3	51.32–77.08	70.66	65.42–75.40	0.92
PPV (%)	63.58	56.19–70.38	19.05	7.67–40.0	38.81	31.44–46.75	0.3
NPV (%)	95.55	88.31–94.72	91.43	77.62–97.04	96.13	92.83–97.96	1
PLR	2.8	–	1.65	NA	2.95	NA	–
NLR	0.23	–	NA	NA	NA	NA	–
Accuracy (%)	89.36	83.34–90.21	10.08	51.2–75.85	79.27	68.89–77.67	0.63
Reliability (%)	53.95	–	22.45	–	57.43	–	–
Kappa	0.45	–	–	–	-	–	–

CI Confidence interval, FM Fluorescence microscopy, Se Sensitivity, Sp Specificity, PPV Positive predictive value, NPV Negative predictive value, PLR Positive likelihood ratio, NLR Negative likelihood ratio, NA Not applicable. Pearson’s chi-square test was used to make comparisons. Significance was set at p value < 0.05

ISSN: 1349-4147