Volume 19, Number 12—December 2013
Letter
Evaluation of 3 Electronic Methods Used to Detect Influenza Diagnoses during 2009 Pandemic
Sunita Mulpuru
, Tiffany Smith, Nadine Lawrence, Kumanan Wilson, and Alan J Forster
, Tiffany Smith, Nadine Lawrence, Kumanan Wilson, and Alan J Forster
Table
Performance characteristics of electronic influenza classification methods compared to criterion standard chart review, Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, October–December 2009*
| Influenza classification method | No. |
% (95% CI) |
% |
% (95% CI) |
|||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TP | FP | TN | FN | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | PLR | NLR | ||||
| DAD flu diagnosis | 49 | 12 | 332 | 5 | 90.7 (79.7–96.9) | 96.5 (94–98.2) | 80.3 | 98.5 | 26 (14.9–45.7) | 0.10 (0.04–0.22) | |||
| Positive laboratory result | 43 | 7 | 337 | 11 | 79.7 (66.5–89.4) | 98 (95.9–99.2) | 86.0 | 96.8 | 39.1 (18.6–82.5) | 0.21 (0.12–0.35) | |||
| Antiviral drug prescribed | 51 | 83 | 261 | 3 | 94.4 (84.6–98.8) | 75.9 (71–80.3) | 38.0 | 98.8 | 3.9 (3.2–4.8) | 0.07 (0.02–0.22) | |||
*TP, true positive; FP, false positive; TN, true negative: FN, false negative; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; PLR, positive likelihood ratio; NLR, negative likelihood ratio; DAD Flu Diagnosis = International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification, diagnosis code for influenza on the discharge abstract database stored in the Ottawa Hospital Data Warehouse.
Page created: November 20, 2013
Page updated: November 20, 2013
Page reviewed: November 20, 2013
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.