Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: mrsmith

“My concern is that testing a low prevalence population will result in many false positives unless the test nears 100% specificity. A test our lab is evaluating has 96% clinical specificity. If antibody prevalence is 1%, 80% of positive tests will be false positives.”

I can’t explain this but see such claims often


162 posted on 04/08/2020 5:52:56 PM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts (M / F) : Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]


To: mrsmith

Dr Stephen McColgan, with Vivera Pharmaceuticals talking about the antibodies testing kits, that his company makes.

He said Germany is using same/similar tests, as are several other countries.

Also said that Trump is trying to cut through FDA redtape, but, it’s just a tough thing to do :(


165 posted on 04/08/2020 5:58:12 PM PDT by Jane Long (Praise God, from whom ALL blessings flow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]

To: mrsmith

“A test our lab is evaluating has 96% clinical specificity. If antibody prevalence is 1%, 80% of positive tests will be false positives.”

The test is accurate 96% of the time, wrong 4% of the time. So if 1% of the people have antibodies, you’ll get “1” (0.96) accurate positives and “4” (3.84) false positives. 80% of your positives will be false positives.

“Fortunately” prevalence will be much, much larger than 1% by the time this is over. But I’d rather have 80% false positives than any number of false negatives.


169 posted on 04/08/2020 6:11:25 PM PDT by calenel (Don't panic. Prepare and be vigilant. Join the war effort. On the human side.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson