The actual paper is behind a paywall.
Yay for institute access. Their idea of "approach[ing] 100%" is a little bit loose:
Based on these calculations, the cutoffs for low (0.10), medium (0.25), and high (0.50) thresholds are 1.47 at a sensitivity of 94.8% and a specificity of 54.7%, 1.73 at a sensitivity of 81% and a specificity of 78.7%, and 1.99 at a sensitivity of 62.1% and a specificity of 94%, respectively
I have yet to do the calculations using population prevalence, but I'm going to guess that the positive predictive value of these tests are not particularly high.