3 ms·
I understand his argument but better have a false positive than a false negative in my opinion.
by doe88 8y ago
I understand his argument but better have a false positive than a false negative in my opinion.
- mentalhealth 8y agoThis is manifestly not the case, and there are a large number of studies showing why this is true (many linked elsewhere in this thread). Most people do not have a good understanding of the risks associated with ongoing medical testing/medical visits. A hopefully not-too-inaccurate analogy might be if you heard a strange sound while driving your car, and took it into your mechanic, whose shop gets paid more the more tests they do and the more labor they put into fixing your potential non-problem, and they're potentially liable if anything later goes wrong that could be traced to that sound. Think about where the systemic incentives lie.
- avip 8y agoThe numbers mentioned (90% specificity) are for 100% sensitivity (not mentioned in post). These numbers are for patients taking ECG under controlled conditions. Continuous monitoring for AF under arbitrary conditions seems indeed problematic to me.