Those are the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM values, yes. If every single positive was false (extraordinarily unlikely) in testing datasets, those are the lowest possible values for specificity. A more realistic range would use that as the lowest estimate and 100% as the highest
I'm especially confused because the ONS sample was literally run "as part of the national testing scheme" which means that these are the same tests being run on samples collected in the same way, but split up into different groups
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Right. Sampling a lower acuity population, like the ONS random sample, would give you a lower PPV, because the population prevalence is low. But the pillar I/II samples have a ~higher~ acuity, so the PPV would be HIGHER (i.e. lower ratio of false/true positives
- Show replies
-
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.