Table 1

Studies comparing of ‘gold standard’ methods for C. difficile showing sensitivity, specificity and kappa values

ReferenceSensitivitySpecificityκ (SE)Patient group
Cytotoxigenic culture as reference standard
Van pouke et al (2001)110.743 (55/74)0.997 (291/292)0.814 (0.052)Stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
Barbut et al (2009)120.758 (25/33)1.000 (267/267)0.848 (0.058)Diarrhoeal stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
Kelly et al (1987)100.684 (65/95)0.996 (529/531)0.774 (0.039)Stool samples received in laboratory
Eastwood et al (2009)130.864 (108/125)0.992 (471/475)0.890 (0.041)Stool samples received in laboratory
Fedorko et al (1999)90.718 (56/78)0.981 (565/576)0.744 (0.039)Stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
Merz et al (1994)80.855 (47/55)0.994 (639/643)0.878 (0.038)Stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
DiPersio et al (1991)70.814 (35/43)0.967 (261/270)0.773 (0.057)Stool samples received in laboratory
Schué et al (1994)60.790 (49/62)0.993 (291/293)0.842 (0.053)Stool samples received in laboratory
Cell cytotoxicity assay as reference standard
Van pouke et al (2001)110.982 (55/56)0.939 (291/310)0.814 (0.052)Stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
Barbut et al (2009)121.000 (25/25)0.971 (267/275)0.848 (0.058)Diarrhoeal stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
Kelly et al (1987)100.970 (65/67)0.946 (529/559)0.774 (0.039)Stool samples received in laboratory
Eastwood et al (2009)130.964 (108/112)0.965 (471/488)0.890 (0.041)Stool samples received in laboratory
Fedorko et al (1999)90.836 (56/67)0.963 (565/587)0.744 (0.039)Stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
Merz et al (1994)80.922 (47/51)0.988 (639/647)0.878 (0.038)Stool sample with request for C difficile toxin
DiPersio et al (1991)70.795 (35/44)0.970 (261/269)0.773 (0.057)Stool samples received in laboratory
Schué et al (1994)60.961 (49/51)0.957 (291/304)0.842 (0.053)Stool samples received in laboratory