Annex 2 Comparative performance of algorithms for the general population and high-risk groups (not including people living with HIV)

The tables below contain modelled estimates of the performance and outcomes of the 10 screening algorithms described above, when applied to a population of 100,000 people being screened, across three different TB prevalence settings: 0.5%, 1% and 2%. 

1 – Screening with cough

2 – Parallel screening with cough and CXR

3 – Sequential positive serial screening with cough and CXR

4 – Sequential negative serial screening with cough and CXR

5 – Screening with any TB symptom

6 – Parallel screening with any TB symptom and CXR

7 – Sequential positive serial screening with any TB symptom and CXR

8 – Sequential negative serial screening with any TB symptom and CXR

9 – Screening with CXR followed by mWRD

10 – Screening with mWRD followed by diagnostic exam (consisting of repeated mWRD, CXR, other clinical tests and procedures as indicated)

100 000 people screened with 0.5% TB prevalence

 100 000 people screened with 1% TB prevalence

 100 000 people screened with 2% TB prevalence

TP – True positive diagnosis

FP – False positive diagnosis

FN – False negative diagnosis

TN – True negative diagnosis

PPV – Positive predictive value

NPV – Negative predictive value

Book navigation