Pooled Analysis of the Accuracy of Xpert Ebola Assay for Diagnosing Ebola Virus Infection

Table 1

Characteristics of the included 4 studies.

Authors	Study design	Location	Source of strains	Reference standard	Ebola virus				Blinded review or interpretation	The characteristics of the controls
					TP	FP	FN	TN
James Pettitt [19] (2015)	Prospective cohort study	America	402 semen	Ebola Zaire target 1 (EZ1) and major groove binder RT-PCR	94	0	4	308	Yes	Samples were collected from uninfected individuals
Amy James Loftis [20] (2016)	Prospective cohort study	America	80 semen	Traditional PCR	30	0	0	50	Yes	Samples were procured commercially from healthy donors
Rafael Van den Bergh [14] (2016)	Prospective cohort study	Belgium	218 semen	A routine in-house Ebola PCR	18	8	0	192	Yes	Suspected EVD patients for routine diagnosis between May 2 and July 4, 2015
Amanda E. Semper [15] (2016)	Prospective cohort study	England	218 WB	Reverse transcription PCR, Trombley	22	8	0	181	Yes	Residual diagnostic specimens remaining after clinical testing from suspected or confirmed EVD patients between April 1 and July 20, 2015
Amanda E. Semper [15] (2016)	Prospective cohort study	England	64 semen	Reverse transcription PCR, Trombley	20	0	0	44	Yes	Residual diagnostic samples remaining after clinical testing from suspected or confirmed EVD patients between March 7 and July 20, 2015, some of which had been frozen before use

TP: true positive; TN: true negative; FP: false positive; FN: false negative; WB: whole blood.