Skip to main content

Table 1 Clinician predictions

From: How good is our diagnostic intuition? Clinician prediction of bacteremia in critically ill children

Provider Predictions

Blood Culture Result

Sensitivity (95% CI)

Specificity (95% CI)

Positive Predictive Value (95% CI)

Negative Predictive Value (95% CI)

Positive (n)

Negative (n)

Overall Prediction of Culture Result

Positive (n)

41

107

82% (0.68,0.91)

69% (0.64, 0.74)

28% (0.21, 0.36)

96% (0.93, 0.98)

Negative (n)

9

241

RN Prediction of Culture Result

Positive (n)

9

29

90% (0.54,0.99)

61% (0.49, 0.72)

24% (0.12, 0.41)

98% (0.87, 0.99)

Negative (n)

1

45

FLP Prediction of Culture Result

Positive (n)

6

26

86% (0.42, 0.99)

67% (0.55, 0.77)

19% (0.08, 0.37)

98% (0.89, 0.99)

Negative (n)

1

52

Fellow Prediction of Culture Result

Positive (n)

17

30

81% (0.57, 0.94)

75% (0.66, 0.82)

36% (0.23, 0.52)

96% (0.89, 0.99)

Negative (n)

4

90

Attending Prediction of Culture Result

Positive (n)

9

22

75% (0.43, 0.93)

71% (0.59, 0.81)

29% (0.15, 0.48)

95% (0.84, 0.99)

Negative (n)

3

54

  1. Blood culture results compared to clinician prediction and characteristics of clinician prediction, separated by provider type. This table illustrates a series of classic “2 × 2” tables to calculate test characteristics sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. For example, among RNs, the sensitivity was 90% or 9 of 10 positive cultures were correctly predicted to be positive. Abbreviations: RN registered nurse, FLP front line provider (in our unit, a resident or nurse practitioner), n number of observations, CI confidence interval