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
If nothing else, the study was of *labs* not of *tests* so it doesn't actually make any comment on specificity at all
-
-
Lol! So that's ok then? Don't worry patients it was the labs that got it wrong not the tests!
-
Hilarious, but no it simply means that, again, the test specificity is very high and thus the false positive rate is extremely low as demonstrated mathematically above
- 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.