false negative observations
480 true negative observations
400 persons with X
600 persons without X
Positive predictive value = —a— = -true positives (360)-x 100 = 75%
Thus, 3 out of 4 of the persons with positive observations really have the disease, and 1 out of 4 does not.
By a similar calculation, you can determine the probability that a negative observation is a true negative. The results here are reasonably reassuring to the involved patient:
Negative predictive value = —d— = —true negatives (480)— x 100 = 92%
As prevalence of the disease in a population diminishes, however, the predictive value of a positive observation diminishes remarkably, while the predictive value of a negative observation rises further. In Example 2, in a second population, B, of 1000 people, only 1% have disease X. Now there are only 10 cases of X and 990 people without X. If this population is screened with the same observation, which has a 90% sensitivity and an 80% specificity, here are the results:
Example 2. Prevalence of Disease X = 1%
Disease X Present Absent
Was this article helpful?
You are about to discover the "little-known" techniques, tricks and "mind tools" that will show you how to easily "program" your body and mind to produce an instant, rock-hard erection. Learn how to enjoy all of the control, confidence and satisfaction that comes from knowing you can always "rise to the challenge" ... and never have to deal with embarrassment, apologies, shyness or performance anxiety in the bedroom, ever again.