It is the minimum POSSIBLE figure if every positive in their validation dataset was a false positive. The true number is likely closer to 100%, as seen in Australia, China, and Germany, but as the worst possible situation it is a useful example
Worth noting that we know the sensitivity of these tests, and it is not 0%, so a specificity of 99.92% is actually impossible. Using the ONS numbers, and a sensitivity of 80% (low, but for the sake of argument) you get a specificity of ~99.9947%
-
-
Based on what gold standard?
-
That's literally the mathematics assuming a sensitivity of 80% with the numbers from the ONS. 159 samples positive in 209,000 tests means minimum possible spec is 99.92%, 80% sensitivity gives you ~99.9947%
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
