Table 3.

Operating characteristics of the HEP score and 4Ts score by scorer experience

ModelAUC (95% CI)P*CutoffSensitivity, % (95% CI)Specificity, % (95% CI)PPV, % (95% CI)NPV, % (95% CI)
Attending physicians, 103 cases:
HIT prevalence, 9.8% 
       
 HEP score 0.85 (0.74-0.96) .85 100 (69.2-100) 40.9 (30.8-51.5) 15.4 (7.6-26.5) 100 (90.7-100) 
 4Ts 0.84 (0.74-0.94) 100 (69.2-100) 43.5 (32.8-53.7) 15.9 (7.9-27.3) 100 (91.2-100) 
Trainees, 189 cases:
HIT prevalence, 18% 
       
 HEP score 0.80 (0.72-0.88) .02 93.9 (79.8-99.3) 32.7 (25.4-40.7) 22.8 (16.0-30.8) 96.2 (87-99.5) 
 4Ts 0.72 (0.63-0.81) 97.0 (84.2-99.9) 26.9 (20.1-34.6) 21.9 (15.5-29.5) 97.7 (87.7-99.9) 
ModelAUC (95% CI)P*CutoffSensitivity, % (95% CI)Specificity, % (95% CI)PPV, % (95% CI)NPV, % (95% CI)
Attending physicians, 103 cases:
HIT prevalence, 9.8% 
       
 HEP score 0.85 (0.74-0.96) .85 100 (69.2-100) 40.9 (30.8-51.5) 15.4 (7.6-26.5) 100 (90.7-100) 
 4Ts 0.84 (0.74-0.94) 100 (69.2-100) 43.5 (32.8-53.7) 15.9 (7.9-27.3) 100 (91.2-100) 
Trainees, 189 cases:
HIT prevalence, 18% 
       
 HEP score 0.80 (0.72-0.88) .02 93.9 (79.8-99.3) 32.7 (25.4-40.7) 22.8 (16.0-30.8) 96.2 (87-99.5) 
 4Ts 0.72 (0.63-0.81) 97.0 (84.2-99.9) 26.9 (20.1-34.6) 21.9 (15.5-29.5) 97.7 (87.7-99.9) 
*

P value represents comparison of AUC using the method of DeLong et al.17 

Exact binomial CIs displayed for sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal