Stereo tests as a screening tool for strabismus: which is the best choice?

Figures & data

Figure 1 Stereo tests results showing the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for strabismus expressed in percentages.

Abbreviations: NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value.

Table 1 Stereo tests results showing the sensitivity, specificity, and PPVs and NPVs with 95% CI

	Lang I (95% CI)	Lang II (95% CI)	Titmus (95% CI)	TNO (95% CI)
Sensitivity	89.8% (79.2–95.6)	84.7% (73.2–92)	83.1% (71.3–90)	79.7% (67.6–88.1)
Specificity	95.2% (88–98.5)	79.8% (69.9–87)	83.3% (73.8–89.9)	86.9% (77.9–92.7)
PPV	93% (82.8–97.7)	74.6% (63–83.6)	77.8% (66–86.4)	81% (69–89.2)
NPV	93% (85.3–97)	88.2% (78.8–93.9)	87.5% (78.3–93.3)	85.9% (76.8–91.9)

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; NPV, negative predictive value; PPV, positive predictive value.

Figure 2 Stereo test receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under ROC curve.

Notes: Shows all details of the ROC analysis results. The Lang I stereo test discloses the major AUC (area under ROC curve) of 0.92, compared to the Lang II (0.82), Titmus and TNO testing (0.83). All results appeared statistically significant (P=0.0001).