Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Clin Cases. Dec 6, 2021; 9(34): 10507-10517
Published online Dec 6, 2021. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i34.10507
Table 3 Comparison between methods with and without rapid on-site evaluation

FNA alone
FNA with ROSE
FNB alone
FNB with ROSE
Sensitivity63.19% (95%CI 55.29 to 70.60)86.45% (95%CI 80.04 to 91.41)81.66% (95%CI 77.50 to 85.34)82.97% (95%CI 76.70 to 88.12)
Specificity96.69% (95%CI 91.75 to 99.06)100.00% (95%CI 86.77 to 100.00)100.00% (95%CI 95.04 to 100.00)100.00% (95%CI 75.29 to 100.00)
Positive likelihood ratio19.12 (95%CI 7.24 to 50.46)NA89.82 (95%CI 12.76 to 632.37)NA
Negative likelihood ratio0.38 (95%CI 0.31 to 0.47)0.14 (95%CI 0.09 to 0.20)0.19 (95%CI 0.15 to 0.23)0.17 (95%CI 0.12 to 0.23)
Positive predictive value96.26% (95%CI 90.70 to 98.55)100.00%99.69% (95%CI 97.88 to 99.96)100.00%
Negative predictive value66.10% (95%CI 61.40 to 70.51)55.32% (95%CI 45.41 to 64.82)59.89% (95%CI 54.81 to 64.77)29.55% (95%CI 23.33 to 36.62)
Accuracy77.46% (95%CI 72.16 to 82.19)88.40% (95%CI 82.81 to 92.67)85.43% (95%CI, 82.06 to 88.39)84.10% (95%CI 78.20 to 88.94)