Editor—We entirely agree with Wilson's comments on our paper1 that sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) cannot be equated,2 and appreciate the opportunity to clarify this point. Indeed, it is important to highlight that a sensitive test often has a low PPV (Table 1).3 In the editorial, we did not in fact liken sensitivity to PPV, but rather related sensitivity to negative predictive value (NPV), using the acronym SNOUT (a negative result in a sensitive test rules out the disease). Table 1NPV, negative predictive value. PPV, positive predictive value. This table illustrates that a sensitive test (e.g.≥90%) has a high NPV (e.g.≥80%), except when the prevalence of a disorder is high and the specificity of the test is lowPrevalence %Sensitivity %Specificity %PPV %NPV %190908.399.9190501.899.8190201.199.520909069.297.320905031.095.220902022.088.950909090.090.050905064.383.350902052.966.7
http://ift.tt/2ASoHG8
Medicine by Alexandros G. Sfakianakis,Anapafseos 5 Agios Nikolaos 72100 Crete Greece,00302841026182,00306932607174,alsfakia@gmail.com,
Ετικέτες
Εγγραφή σε:
Σχόλια ανάρτησης (Atom)
-
Summary Insulinomas are rare neuroendocrine tumours that classically present with fasting hypoglycaemia. This case report discusses an un...
-
The online platform for Taylor & Francis Online content New for Canadian Journal of Remote Sen...
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου