4 ms·
The testing positivity rate is relatively useless at this point. For example, in my State, there is no way to report a positive test from a rapid result. Only P
by ianhawes 5y ago
The testing positivity rate is relatively useless at this point. For example, in my State, there is no way to report a positive test from a rapid result. Only PCR tests administered by a medical professional are considered valid for statistical purposes, even though the government is giving out free rapid tests.
- parkingrift 5y agoI don't think it's useless. I think it's a pretty good indication that there are many multiples of actual cases for every confirmed case. If covid cases have risen 5,000% in 30 days, but hospitalizations have only risen 100%, that's an extraordinarily positive outcome.
- thomaslord 5y agoThis is for good reason. Rapid tests are substantially less sensitive and often give false negatives, especially for asymptomatic cases. There are also a lot of rapid "at home" tests out there that have high false positive rates, so even if non-PCR tests were added to the data the only reasonable approach would be to still require them to be administered by a medical professional to make sure the test is correctly administered and that the test itself is relatively high quality.
- ianhawes 5y agoThe idea that rapid tests are less sensitive and therefore not valuable is summer-2020 thinking and outdated. Rapid tests are perfectly fine and should be counted by health departments. Case in point. My family of 4 all tested positive on rapid tests. 3/4 of us had symptoms. None of us received PCR tests because the next available appointments (other than a 6 hour wait at a state run testing center) were a week away. Thats 4 people not counted. And we were part of an outbreak that included 3 other families that all tested positive via rapid tests.