Tools

Add a finding for this diagnosis

Add prevalence for this diagnosis

Switch to calculator mode to see positive predictive value

Switch to sensitivity and specificity

Sort findings by Tag

Sort findings by Differential Diagnosis

Jump To

Good Negative Likelihood Ratio

Good Positive Likelihood Ratio

Poorly Diagnostic Findings

Acute Conjunctivitis, Bacterial: Likelihood Ratios

Introduction: Acute conjunctivitis can be either viral or bacterial. One study in children had a 54% prevalence of bacterial etiology (42% H flu, 12% S pneumo) and 20% prevalence of adenoviral, with ~30% culture negative [J Pediatr. 1981 Apr;98(4):531-6. PMID: 6970802]. Another study in adults showed that 32% of patients had a bacterial etiology, with 47% S pneumo, 23% S aureus, 16% H flu [BMJ. 2004 Jul 24;329(7459):206-10. PMID: 1520119].

[Edit Diagnosis] [Merge dx] [Add prevalence]

Tags: Infection Ophthalmology Tag this Diagnosis.

The likelihood ratios of findings for Acute Conjunctivitis, Bacterial are listed below. See the left navigation bar to change the display.

Good Negative Likelihood Ratio

1.3

0.3

either unilateral or bilateral, in the morning

Study: BMJ. 2004 Jul 24;329(7459):206-10. PMID: 15201195. [Note that I have recalculated the PLR and NLR from their raw data - I disagree with the way they calculated certain things.]

No History of Conjunctivitis

1.2

0.4

Study: BMJ. 2004 Jul 24;329(7459):206-10. PMID: 15201195. [Note that I have recalculated the PLR and NLR from their raw data - I disagree with the way they calculated certain things.]

Good Positive Likelihood Ratio

Bilateral Glued Eyes

3.6

0.7

in the morning

Study: BMJ. 2004 Jul 24;329(7459):206-10. PMID: 15201195. [Note that I have recalculated the PLR and NLR from their raw data - I disagree with the way they calculated certain things.]

Bilateral Secretion

2.3

0.8

Study: BMJ. 2004 Jul 24;329(7459):206-10. PMID: 15201195. [Note that I have recalculated the PLR and NLR from their raw data - I disagree with the way they calculated certain things.]

Poorly Diagnostic Findings

Purulent Secretion

0.8

1.1

(note that this is not sens / spec at all - in fact it may be slightly less prevalent in bacterial!)

Study: BMJ. 2004 Jul 24;329(7459):206-10. PMID: 15201195. [Note that I have recalculated the PLR and NLR from their raw data - I disagree with the way they calculated certain things.]