{"id":884,"date":"2014-03-09T20:35:06","date_gmt":"2014-03-09T19:35:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/adc\/?p=884"},"modified":"2014-03-12T16:44:10","modified_gmt":"2014-03-12T15:44:10","slug":"sensitivity-and-specificity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bmj.com\/adc\/2014\/03\/09\/sensitivity-and-specificity\/","title":{"rendered":"Sensitivity and specificity"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"20140303-213332.jpg\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Sensitivity and specificity are those sorts of things that can really get knickers twisted up something rotten. They sound like something you should be able to understand, they get used as if you understand them, and then you realise … it’s not quite as you thought … <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\u00a0<\/td>\n\n

Really diseased\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Really not diseased\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

Test +ve\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

A\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

B\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

1.. A\/(A+B)\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Test -ve\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

C\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

D\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.. C\/(C+D)\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\u00a0<\/td>\n\n

3… A\/(A+C)\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

4… D\/(B+D)\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\n\u00a0<\/p>\n

Looking at the Table above \u2013 which of 1.. to 4.. is sensitivity?\n<\/p>\n<\/a>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n