4 ms·
Many physicians are terrible at interpreting results of screening tests: http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7562/284 http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7562/284 For s
by capnrefsmmat 13y ago
Many physicians are terrible at interpreting results of screening tests:
http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7562/284 http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7562/284
For screening tests where the problem being screened for is rare, most results will be false positives, but the result is not intuitive.
- grandalf 13y agoDoctors being lousy Bayesians is (if anything) an argument in favor of services like 23andme!
- pdabbadabba 13y agoRight. IF 23 And Me can show that its test are accurate. But they can't (or have refused to do so). That's the whole point.
- nickff 13y ago23 And Me should only have to prove that it is better than the alternative, not that it is accurate (to determine whether the service is of net benefit to the public). Depending on the counter-factual, 23AM could provide a relatively inaccurate test that would still be better than no test. Unfortunately for us, the FDA is on a quest for "safety"; the agency does not try to help the citizenry live longer or happier.