error concerning the interpretation of the diagnostic properties of the IDEXX HerdChek for CWD

[Guest guest]

Hi Bob,

Glad to see that you came on board! and am looking forward to your

posts about that MADCOW you kilt et al

 

 

International Society for Infectious Diseases

<http://www.isid.org>

 

18 Mar 2004

Geoffrey Fosgate <GFosgate

 

 

There seems to be a minor error concerning the interpretation of the

diagnostic properties of the IDEXX HerdChek for CWD. A sensitivity

of 98.8 percent and specificity of 100 percent would suggest no

false-positive results, but a small proportion of false-negative

results.

 

Perfect specificity would be a little unusual given the nature of the

detection platform. I tend to be cautious when interpreting

sensitivity and specificity estimates independent of information

concerning the sample size, sample selection, and gold standard

determination.

 

--

Geoffrey T. Fosgate DVM, PhD, DACVPM

Assistant Professor, Epidemiology

Department of Veterinary Anatomy and Public Health

College of Veterinary Medicine

Texas A & M University

College Station, TX 77843-4458

<GFosgate

 

[ProMED-mail appreciates Dr. Fosgate's correction and agrees with his

caution regarding the manufacturer's claim of perfect specificity. -

Mod.LM]

 

[see also:

Chronic wasting disease, cervids - USA (WI) 20040312.0690

2003

----

Chronic wasting disease, cervids - USA (SD)(03) 20030725.1822

Chronic wasting disease, cervids - USA (WI) (02) 20030707.1668

Chronic wasting disease, cervids - USA (IL, WI) 20030510.1165

Chronic wasting disease, cervids - USA (WI) 20030204.0301

Chronic wasting disease, cervids - USA (NE, WI) 20030114.0112]

.......................tg/pg/lm

 

 

Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam