Skip to main content

Table 1 Detection rates per lab based on two empirical rules and three statistical tests (CIP proficiency panel phases I–III)

From: Response definition criteria for ELISPOT assays revisited

LabID # Expected responses Detected based on empirical rule 1 Detected based on empirical rule 2 Detected based on t test Detected based on DFR(eq) test Detected based on DFR(2x) test
N % N % N % N % N %
Overall 282 165 59 210 74 214 76 212 75 172 61
1 21 13 62 17 81 16 76 17 81 13 62
2 21 12 57 13 62 13 62 11 52 8 38
3 21 11 52 17 81 17 81 17 81 14 67
4 21 13 62 15 71 14 67 11 52 10 48
5 21 5 24 5 24 8 38 8 38 4 19
6 14 9 64 9 64 12 86 12 86 9 64
7 21 14 67 18 86 19 90 19 90 16 76
8 21 10 48 14 67 17 81 16 76 13 62
9 21 16 76 21 100 20 95 20 95 18 86
10 8 6 75 6 75 6 75 6 75 6 75
11 21 11 52 15 71 16 76 16 76 14 67
12 14 7 50 11 79 8 57 9 64 8 57
13 15 9 60 14 93 13 87 13 87 10 67
15 7 4 57 7 100 7 100 7 100 6 86
16 7 5 71 5 71 5 71 6 86 4 57
19 7 7 100 7 100 7 100 7 100 7 100
21 7 4 57 7 100 5 71 6 86 5 71
23 7 5 71 5 71 6 86 6 86 3 43
24 7 4 57 4 57 5 71 5 71 4 57
  1. The first line reports the overall results for the whole group. The following rows report the results for the 19 individual centers that participated in the three phases of the CIP proficiency panel program. The first column indicates the laboratory IDs, the second column indicates the number of positive donor-antigen combinations (=responses) that could have been detected under optimal conditions