A comparative study on indicators of vitamin A status and risk factors for sensitivity and specificity of the methods to detect vitamin A deficiency

Table 2 Prevalence of vitamin A deficiency and accuracy of vitamin A biomarkers in children 36–59 of age in rural Burkina Faso

Parameters	Unadjusted serum retinol¹	Adjusted serum retinol¹	Unadjusted RBP²	Adjusted RBP²
Prevalence of VAD	30.9 (22.4; 40.9)	26.8 (18.8; 36.6)	33.3 (24.9; 43.0)	37.1 (28.4; 46.9)
Sensitivity³	-	-	-	-
Specificity⁴	71.1	75.9	68.9	67.8
Positive predictive value⁵	0	0	0	0
Negative predictive value⁶	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
True positive	0	0	0	0
False positive	28.9 (20.1; 39.7)	24.1 (16.0; 34.6)	31.1 (22.3; 41.5)	32.2 (23.3; 42.7)
False negative	0	0	0	0
True negative	71.1 (60.3; 79.9)	75.9 (65.4; 84.0)	68.9 (58.5; 77.7)	67.8 (57.3; 76.7)
Diagnosis accuracy⁷	71.1 (60.3; 79.9)	75.9 (65.4; 84.0)	68.9 (58.5; 77.7)	67.8 (57.3; 76.7)

VAD, Vitamin A deficiency; RBP, Retinol binding-protein; TLR, Total liver vitamin A reserves
Values are presented as % (95% Confidence Interval)
¹n=97 for prevalence, and n = 83 for accuracy test
²n=105 for prevalence, and n = 90 for accuracy test
³Sensitivity [True Positive / (True Positive + False Negative)]
⁴Specificity [True Negative / (False Positive + True Negative)]
⁵Positive predictive value [True Positive / (True Positive + False Positive)]
⁶Negative predictive value [True Negative / (False Negative + True Negative)]
⁷Diagnosis accuracy [True Positive + True Negative]

ISSN: 1743-7075