3 ms·
> "well enough" This is the medical field. There is no well enough. Even modeling for cancer detection we do 95% and medical device they do 99% confidence int
by digitalzombie 10y ago
> "well enough"
This is the medical field. There is no well enough.
Even modeling for cancer detection we do 95% and medical device they do 99% confidence interval IIRC. And with model, we choose sensitivity over specificity. We rather accidentally diagnosed them with cancer over accidentally say they don't have cancer when they do.
Also FDA might have a bar what well enough is, and it could high enough that other companies cannot pass it.
- logicallee 10y agoWhat makes you think I thought "good enough" means 55% or 60% efficient, or whatever you object to? Good enough might mean 99% of the time. You said it yourself! >Even modeling for cancer detection we do 95% and medical device they do 99% confidence interval IIRC So, in these applications, 95% and 99% respectively is the meaning of good enough. So to put these in crab terms: maybe the crabs do it at 99.99% (3.89 sigma) and the synthetic they want to push through is only 99%, only 2.5 sigma. So I am saying 99% can be good enough in some contexts - just as you've said. Especially if it costs thousands to do it a la crab. It doesn't have to be better than the crabs' blood to be good enough.