是这个区别吗？

There have been numerous studies to assess the validity and reliability of the crossed straight leg raise (CSLR). CSLR was compared with SLR to predict the presence of disc herniation on physical examination and found to be strongly reliable. In one study, CSLR was positive in 97% of patients as compared with 64% with SLR alone. When evaluating the presence of herniations at surgery, the study by Kosteljanetz and colleagues revealed that 19 of 20 positive patients had correlative findings [64]. Andersson and Deyo demonstrated that the CSLR had a higher specificity (85– 100%) and a lower sensitivity (23–42%) as compared with the SLR when reviewing various studies as well as a high positive predictive value of 79% and negative predictive value of 44% [65]. These findings were confirmed by Deville and colleagues in a meta-analysis, which also revealed a low sensitivity (29%) and high specificity (88%) [63]. A more recent Cochrane review provided a similar conclusion, with CSLR showing high specificity (pooled estimate 0.90, 95% CI 0.85–0.94) with consistently low sensitivity (pooled estimate 0.28, 95% CI 0.22–0.35) [66]. A positive CSLR has been shown to predict poor prognosis of conservative management as well as those who would have positive outcomes with surgical intervention. Until recently there has been very limited evidence-based research on other lumbar provocative tests; however, with these new contributions, there is a better understanding of the utility of these tests.

已经有大量的研究评估交叉直腿抬高测试(crossed straight leg raise，CSLR)的有效性和可靠性。将CSLR与SLR比较，预测体格检查时CSLR阳性是否有椎间盘突出，发现可靠性很强。在一项研究中，97%的椎间盘突出症患者CSLR测试阳性，而只有64%患者单独使用SLR测试呈阳性。Kosteljanetz及其同事的研究显示，手术证实20名CSLR阳性患者中19名有腰椎间盘突出的证据^[64]。Andersson和Deyo证实，在综述了各种研究时，与SLR相比，CSLR具有更高的特异度(85～100%)和更低的灵敏度(23～42%)，以及79%的高阳性预测值和44%的阴性预测值^[65]。Deville和他的同事在荟萃分析中证实了这些结果，也揭示了CSLR低敏感性(29%)和高特异性(88%)^[63]。最近的一项Cochrane综述提供了类似的结论，CSLR显示出高特异性(汇总估计值0.90，95%可信区间0.85～0.94)，而敏感度一直很低(汇总估计值0.28，95%可信区间0.22～0.35)^[66]。已证明CSLR阳性可预测保守治疗预后不良和手术治疗效果好。目前关于其他腰椎刺激性测试的循证研究非常有限；然而，随着新的文献的补充，人们对这些测试的实用性有了更好的理解。

各位老师，我理解的对吗？

CSLR was positive in 97% of patients 97%的椎间盘突出症患者CSLR测试阳性（第一个是诊断不足，有漏诊）

19 of 20 positive patients had correlative findings20名CSLR阳性患者中19名有腰椎间盘突出的证据（第二个是诊断过度，有误诊）

是这个区别吗？

我把64的参考文献看了一下，根本就没这方面内容啊