The performance of the World Rugby Head Injury Assessment Screening Tool: a diagnostic accuracy study

Sports Medicine - Open

Table 4 Diagnostic accuracy of HIA01 screening tool sub-tests compared if normative thresholds applied^a

Sub-test	TP	FN	FP	TN	Sensitivity (%, 95% CI)	Specificity (%, 95% CI)	AUROC (95% CI)
Maddocks questions	40	408	16	654	8.9 (6.5–12.0)	97.6 (96.2–98.6)	0.5 (0.5–0.6)
Immediate memory	22	426	9	661	4.9 (3.1–7.3)	98.7 (97.5–99.4)	0.5 (0.5–0.5)
Digits backwards	152	296	106	564	33.9 (29.6–38.5)	84. (81.2–86.9)	0.6 (0.6–0.6)
Tandem gait	8	440	2	668	1.79 (0.78–3.49)	99.7 (98.9–100.0)	0.5 (0.5–0.5)
Symptoms	249	199	71	599	55.6 (50.8–60.2)	89.4 (86.8–91.6)	0.7 (0.7–0.8)
Delayed recall	89	359	34	636	19.9 (16.3–23.9)	94.9 (93.0–96.5)	0.6 (0.5–0.6)
Clinical signs^b	189	259	43	627	42.2 (37.6–46.9)	93.6 (91.5–95.3)	0.7 (0.7–0.7)

TP true positive, FN false negative, FP false positive, TN true negative, AUROC area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic
^aNormative threshold = off-field screening sub-test performance worse than the normative threshold detailed in Table 1.
^bSub-test does not have normative or baseline threshold