2 thoughts on “My latest Slate article”

  1. You need to correct that article ASAP. You literally reversed sensitivity and specificity. It is deeply misleading, in fact rapid tests have a much better negative predictive value than positive predictive value.

    1. A test with no false positives has 100% positive predictive value. 
      PPV is defined as TP/(TP +FP)If FP = 0, then PPV is 1
      (It is very unusual I admit for a test to have no false positives…)
      I wanted to add a discussion of PPV and NPV but they said no. It will hopefully be in another article.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.