Table 4 Output from Bayesian LCA to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic tests. The mean estimate for each parameter is shown, with 95% Bayesian Credible Intervals (BCI) shown in parentheses. Analysis was performed separately for CCA trace as negative (left) and CCA trace as positive (right). The covariance terms inputted into each model were selected by comparing the DIC’s of models with differing covariance terms added (see Additional file 1: Table S1). The PPV of CCA performed in Burundi was calculated using the equations described in the methods
| Â | CCA trace negative (%) (95% BCI) | CCA trace positive (%) (95%BCI) |
|---|---|---|
Sensitivity | ||
 Kato-Katz in Burundi | 15.9 (9.2–23.5) | 15.0 (9.6–21.4) |
 CCA in Burundi | 61.1 (49.9–71.9) | 91.5 (85.8–96.0) |
 CCA in Leiden | 79.5 (67.7–89.4) | 72.0 (62.5–80.5) |
 CAA in Leiden | 90.3 (84.5–95.0) | 91.8 (85.0–96.9) |
 Covariance CCAL & CAA | 0.6 (0.0–1.5) |  |
 Covariance CCAB & CCAL |  | 0.3 (0.0–0.7) |
Specificity | ||
 Kato-Katz in Burundi | 97.1 (94.5–99.1) | 97.5 (95.2–99.3) |
 CCA in Burundi | 98.7 (96.6–99.9) | 72.3 (65.6–78.7) |
 CCA in Leiden | 97.3 (94.7–99.2) | 96.8 (93.9–98.8) |
 CAA in Leiden | 74.6 (68.3–81.2) | 85.3 (79.3–91.1) |
 Covariance CCAL & CAA | 0.4 (0.0–1.1) |  |
 Covariance CCAB & CCAL |  | 0.3 (0.0–0.8) |
PPV of CCA in Burundi (95% BCI) | ||
 Trace as negative | 95.8 (89.4–99.6) | |
 Trace as positive | 69.4 (61.7–7.1) | |
 Trace results only | 52.2 (37.8–5.8) | |