Paper detail

Confidence bounds for the sensitivity lack of a less specific diagnostic test, without gold standard

We consider the problem of comparing two diagnostic tests based on a sample of paired test results without true state determinations, in cases where the second test can reasonably be assumed to be at least as specific as the first. For such cases, we provide two informative confidence bounds: A lower one for the prevalence times the sensitivity gain of the second test with respect to the first, and an upper one for the sensitivity of the first test. Neither conditional independence of the two tests nor perfectness of any of them needs to be assumd. An application of the proposed confidence bounds to a sample of 256 pairs of laboratory test results for toxigenic Clostridium difficile provides evidence for a dramatic sensitivity gain through first appropriately culturing Clostridium difficile from stool samples before applying an enzyme-immuno-assay.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.