SlideShare a Scribd company logo
Screening
Professor Tarek Tawfik
Amin
Public Health
Cairo University
amin55@myway.com
Objectives
By the end of the session 4th medical students
should be able to:
- Identify the difference between diagnostic
and screening test.
- Identify and recall the pillars of screening
test accuracy.
- Interpret the output of accuracy parameters
of screening test.
The patient’s scenario
Mrs. Zi has discovered a lump
in her left breast.
So what?
Diagnostic tests: ordered to answer a specific question
Diagnostic tests help physicians revise
disease probability for their patients.
1. Establish a diagnosis in symptomatic patients. ECG
to diagnose ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with chest pain.
2. Screen for disease in asymptomatic patients.
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test in men older than 50 years.
3. Provide prognostic information in patients with
established disease. CD4 count in patients with HIV.
4. Monitor therapy by either benefits or side
effects. Measuring the international normalized ratio (INR) in patients taking
warfarin.
5. Confirm that a person is free from a disease.
Pregnancy test to exclude the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy.
Criterion (reference test)
• The criterion (reference) standard test definitively
decides either presence or absence of a disease.
Pathological specimens for malignancies and pulmonary angiography for pulmonary embolism.
• Criterion standard tests routinely come with
drawbacks; expensive, less widely available, and more invasive. Compel
physicians to choose other diagnostic tests as surrogates (alternative test).
Venography, the criterion standard for vein thrombosis, is an invasive procedure with
significant complications [renal failure, allergic reaction, and clot formation]. Venography less
desirable than the alternative diagnostic test—venous duplex ultrasonography.
• The price most diagnostic tests (surrogates) pay for their
ease of use compared with their criterion standard is a
decrease in accuracy.
Screening Vs. Diagnostic
tests
• Screening tests are not diagnostic tests
• The primary purpose of screening tests is to
detect early disease or risk factors for disease in
large numbers of apparently healthy
individuals.
• The purpose of a diagnostic test is to establish
the presence (or absence) of disease as a basis for
treatment decisions in symptomatic or screen
positive individuals (confirmatory test).
Screening tests Diagnostic tests
1-To detect potential disease indicators 1- To establish presence/absence of disease
2-Large numbers of asymptomatic, but
potentially at risk individuals
2-Symptomatic individuals to establish
diagnosis, or asymptomatic individuals with
a positive screening test
3-Simple, acceptable to patients and staff 3-Maybe invasive, expensive but justifiable
as necessary to establish diagnosis
4-Generally chosen towards high
sensitivity not to miss potential disease
4-Chosen towards high specificity (true
negatives). More weight given to accuracy
and precision than to patient acceptability
5-Essentially indicates suspicion of disease 5- Result provides a definite diagnosis
6-Cheap, benefits should justify the costs
since large numbers of people will need to
be screened to identify a small number of
potential cases
6-Higher costs associated with diagnostic
test maybe justified to establish diagnosis.
The validity of a screening test:
sensitivity and specificity
o The measures of sensitivity and
specificity describe how well the
proposed screening test performs
against an agreed 'Gold Standard'
test.
o In medicine, a gold standard test or criterion
standard test is a diagnostic test or benchmark
that is regarded as definitive.
o The actual gold standard test may be too
unpleasant for the patient, too impractical or too
expensive to be used widely as a screening test
Sensitivity and Specificity
• The outcomes of any screening test
• The calculations
Screening
Disease status as determined by 'Gold Standard'
Disease No Disease
Test positive True positives
(a)
False positives
(b)
Total test
positives (a+b) → Positive
predictive value
Test negative False negatives
(c)
True negatives
(d)
Total test
negatives (c+d) → Negative
predictive value
Total with
disease (a+c)
Total without
disease (b+d)
Total screened
(a+b+c+d)
↓
Sensitivity
↓
Specificity
True positives = number of individuals with disease and a positive screening test (a)
False positives = number of individuals without disease but have a positive screening test (b)
False negatives = number of individuals with disease but have a negative screening test (c)
True negatives = number of individuals without disease and a negative screening test (d)
Missed
cases Labeling
effect
1-Sensitivity
• Sensitivity is defined as the ability of the test to
detect all those with disease in the screened
population. This is expressed as the proportion
of those with disease correctly identified by a
positive screening test result
• Sensitivity = Number of true positives
Total with disease
= a/ (a+c)
2-Specificity
• Specificity is defined as the ability of the test to
identify correctly those free of disease in the
screened population. This is expressed as the
proportion of those without disease correctly
identified by a negative screening test result
• Specificity = Number of true negatives
Total without disease
= d/ (b+d)
3-Positive Predictive Value
• The positive predictive value (PPV) describes the
probability of having the disease given a positive
screening test result in the screened population.
• How many of +ve (s) at screening are actually having the
disease?
This is expressed as the proportion of those with disease
among all screening test positives.
• PPV = Number of true positives
total test positives
PPV = a / (a+b)
4-Negative Predictive Value
• The negative predictive value (NPV) describes the
probability of not having the disease given a negative
screening test result in the screened population.
• How many of –ve (S) are not diseased?
This is expressed as the proportion of those without
disease among all screening test negatives.
• NPV = Number of true negatives
total test negatives
NPV= d / (c+d)
Disease Prevalence Effect
• Sensitivity and specificity are
independent of prevalence of
disease, i.e. test specific (they describe
how well the screening test performs against the gold standard).
• PPV and NPV however are disease
prevalence dependant, i.e.
population specific. PPV and NPV give
information on how well a test screening test will perform in a
given population with known prevalence.
• Generally a higher prevalence
will increase the PPV and
Example
A new ELISA (antibody test) is
developed to diagnose HIV infections.
Serum from 10,000 patients that were
positive by Western Blot (the Gold
Standard assay) was tested, and
9,990 were found to be positive by the
new ELISA screening test.
The manufacturers then used the ELISA
to test serum from 10,000 nuns who
denied risk factors for HIV infection.
9,990 were negative and the 10
HIV [Nuns and HIV patients]
Infected Not infected
ELISA test
+ 9,990 (a) 10 (b)
- 10 (c) 9,990 (d)
10,000 (a+c) 10,000 (b+d)
Sensitivity = a/(a+c)
= 9990/(9990+10)
= 99.9%
Specificity= b/(b+d)
= 9990/(9990+10)
= 99.9%
Excellent test
On population level
The test is applied to a million people where 1%
are infected with HIV (assuming the sensitivity
and specificity remain the same). Of the million
people, 10,000 would be infected with HIV. Since
the new ELISA is 99.9% sensitive, the test will
detect 9,990 (true positives) people who are
actually infected and miss 10 (false negative).
Looking at those numbers the test appears
very good because it detected 9,990 out of
10,000 HIV infected people.
But there is another side to the test. Of the 1
million people in this population, 990,000 are
not infected. Looking at the test results of the
HIV negative population (the specificity of the
assay is 99.9%), 989,010 are found to be not
1% Prevalence
HIV
Infected Not infected
Test
+ 9990 (a) 990 (b)
Test positives
a+b
PPV= a/(a+b)
=
9990/(9990+990)
=91%
- 10 (c) 989,010 (d)
Test negatives
c+d
NPV=
d/(c+d) =989,010/
(10+989,010)
= 99.9%
HIV positive
10,000
HIV negative
999,000
Total screened=
a+b+c+d
Sensitivity =
99,9%
Specificity
= 99,9%
Sensitivity and specificity are not the only performance features because they do not
address the problems of the prevalence of disease in different populations.
For that, the understanding of the positive and negative predictive value is crucial.
Blood donors have already been
screened for HIV risk factors before
they are allowed to donate blood, so
that the HIV sero-prevalence in this
population is closer to 0.1% instead
of 1%. For every 1,000,000 blood
donors, 1,000 are HIV positive. With a
sensitivity of 99.9%, the ELISA would
pick up 999 of those thousand, but
would fail to pick up one HIV sero-
positive individual.
Of the 999,000 uninfected
individuals, the test would label
998,001 individuals assero-negative
(true negatives).
Blood donors 0.1%
Prevalence
HIV
+ -
Test
+ 999 (a) 999 (b)
Test
positives
1,998
PPV=
a/(a+b)
=50%
- 1 (c) 998,001 (d)
Test
negatives
998,002
NPV=
d/(c+d)
=99.999%
HIV
positive
1000
HIV
negative
999,000
Total
a+b+c+d
Sensitivity
99.9%
Specificity
99.9%
• The second population consists
of former IV drug users
attending drug rehabilitation
units, with a prevalence of 10%.
For a million of these
individuals, 100,000 would be
HIV-infected and 900,000 would
be HIV negative.
10% Prevalence
HIV
+ -
Test
+
99,900
(a)
900
(b)
Test
positives
100,800
PPV=
a/(a+b)
=99%
-
100
(c)
899,100
(d)
Test
negatives
899,200
NPV=
d/(c+d)
=99.999%
HIV
negative
100,000
HIV
negative
900,000
Total screened=
a+b+c+d
Sensitivity
99.9%
Specificity
99.9%
• The sensitivity and specificity of the
test has not changed. It is just that
the predictive value of the test has
changed depending on the population
being tested.
• The positive predictive value is how
many of the test-positives truly
have the disease. In the first
example with a 1% sero-positive
rate, the ELISA has a positive
predictive value of 0.91 (91%). When
Remarks
Rema
rks
Although the sensitivity of the ELISA
does not change between
populations, the positive predictive
value changes drastically from
only half the people that tested
positive being truly positive in a
low- incidence population to 99% of
the people testing positive being
truly positive in the high-
prevalence population. The
negative predictive value of the
Derivatives of screening
Term Calculation Plain English
True positive (TP) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients with the disease who have a positive
test result
True negative (TN) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients without the disease who have a
negative test result
False positive (FP) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients without the disease who have a
positive test result
False negative (FN) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients with the disease who have a negative
test result
Sensitivity = True positive rate (TPR) TP / (TP + FN) The probability that a patient with the disease
will have a positive test result
1 - Sensitivity = False-negative rate (FPR) FN / (TP + FN) The probability that a patient with the disease
will have a negative test result
Specificity = True negative rate (TNR) TN / (TN + FP) The probability that a patient without the disease
will have a negative test result
1 - Specificity = False-positive rate (FPR) FP / (TN + FP) The probability that a patient without the disease
will have a positive test result
Positive predictive value TP / (TP + FP) The probability that a patient with a positive test
result will have the disease
Negative predictive value TN / (TN + FN) The probability that a patient with a negative test
result will not have the disease.
Accuracy (TP + TN) / (TP + TN + FP + FN) The probability that the results of a test will
accurately predict presence or absence of disease
Bayes’ theorem Posttest Odds = Pretest Odds X Likelihood Ratio The odds of having or not having the disease after
testing
Likelihood ratio of a positive test result (LR+) Sensitivity / (1 - Specificity) The increase in the odds of having the disease
after a positive test result
Likelihood ratio of a negative test result (LR-) (1 - Sensitivity) / Specificity The decrease in the odds of having the disease
after a negative test result
Thank you

More Related Content

PPT
Research Design
PPT
Measures of Variation
PPTX
Journal club presentation
PPT
Screening
PPTX
Measuring of risk
PPT
chap07.ppt
PPTX
VALIDITY AND RELIABLITY OF A SCREENING TEST seminar 2.pptx
PPT
Research Design
Measures of Variation
Journal club presentation
Screening
Measuring of risk
chap07.ppt
VALIDITY AND RELIABLITY OF A SCREENING TEST seminar 2.pptx

What's hot (20)

PPTX
Chapter 2.2 screening test
PPTX
Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive
PPTX
5. cohort studies
PPTX
Association and causation
PPTX
Biases in epidemiology
PPTX
Screening of disease
PPT
Types of epidemiological designs
PPSX
Bias, confounding and fallacies in epidemiology
PPT
Validity and Screening Test
PPT
Screening tests
PPTX
3. descriptive study
PPT
Epidemiology Study Design
PPT
2.epidemilogic measures
PPT
Validity of a screening test
PPTX
Cohort study
PPT
Ecological study
PPT
Clinical epidemiology
PPTX
Nested case control study
PPTX
CASE CONTROL STUDY
PPT
Epidemiological study designs
Chapter 2.2 screening test
Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive
5. cohort studies
Association and causation
Biases in epidemiology
Screening of disease
Types of epidemiological designs
Bias, confounding and fallacies in epidemiology
Validity and Screening Test
Screening tests
3. descriptive study
Epidemiology Study Design
2.epidemilogic measures
Validity of a screening test
Cohort study
Ecological study
Clinical epidemiology
Nested case control study
CASE CONTROL STUDY
Epidemiological study designs
Ad

Viewers also liked (20)

PPT
Types of Screening
PPTX
PPTX
Estimating risk
DOCX
Mid term english exam beginner iv
PPTX
Screening test
PDF
Evidence based population health screening
PDF
Successful screening
PPT
Recent advances in Screening Test
PPT
Dr swe swe latt screening for slideshare
PPTX
Test Screening
PPT
Viruses
PDF
Expanded newborn screening
PPTX
MATHEMATICS
DOCX
Viroids and prions
PPT
Viruses, viroids, and prions
PPTX
Concepts of Screening for disease
PPTX
Plant and animal viruse
PPTX
Degradation of Bio polymer
PPTX
Equations and Inequalities - Making mathematics accessible to all
Types of Screening
Estimating risk
Mid term english exam beginner iv
Screening test
Evidence based population health screening
Successful screening
Recent advances in Screening Test
Dr swe swe latt screening for slideshare
Test Screening
Viruses
Expanded newborn screening
MATHEMATICS
Viroids and prions
Viruses, viroids, and prions
Concepts of Screening for disease
Plant and animal viruse
Degradation of Bio polymer
Equations and Inequalities - Making mathematics accessible to all
Ad

Similar to Screening test (basic concepts) (20)

PPTX
Screening of Diseases
PDF
6 Screening in Public Health-converted.pdf
PPT
Screeningffkyukuyiuytuytjhgjhgghuytuyg.ppt
PPT
Validity and reliability of screening/ diagnostic tests
PPTX
Disease screening
PPTX
7 Lecture 8 Outbrek invesitgation.pptx
PPTX
evalution for screening test and its importance .pptx
PPTX
CAT 1 -MPH 5101 - FOUNDATIONS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY (1).pptx
PPTX
8 screening.pptxscreening.pptxscreening.
PPTX
Testing and Screening Nov 2021-undergraduate.pptx
PPTX
Epidemiology Chapter Four Screening.pptx
PDF
Lec (8) Screening For Diseases,,,,,,,.pdf
PPTX
SCREENING-1.pptx including sensitivity .
PPTX
Chapter- 1 Introduction (1).pptx to hematolooogyy
PPTX
screening.pptx
PDF
Session%207-Testing%20and%20Screening.pdf.pdf
PPTX
Screening of diseases
PPTX
Epide 8.pptx epidomology assignment year one
PPTX
Epidemiological method to determine utility of a diagnostic test
PDF
screening-140217071714-phpapp02.pdf
Screening of Diseases
6 Screening in Public Health-converted.pdf
Screeningffkyukuyiuytuytjhgjhgghuytuyg.ppt
Validity and reliability of screening/ diagnostic tests
Disease screening
7 Lecture 8 Outbrek invesitgation.pptx
evalution for screening test and its importance .pptx
CAT 1 -MPH 5101 - FOUNDATIONS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY (1).pptx
8 screening.pptxscreening.pptxscreening.
Testing and Screening Nov 2021-undergraduate.pptx
Epidemiology Chapter Four Screening.pptx
Lec (8) Screening For Diseases,,,,,,,.pdf
SCREENING-1.pptx including sensitivity .
Chapter- 1 Introduction (1).pptx to hematolooogyy
screening.pptx
Session%207-Testing%20and%20Screening.pdf.pdf
Screening of diseases
Epide 8.pptx epidomology assignment year one
Epidemiological method to determine utility of a diagnostic test
screening-140217071714-phpapp02.pdf

More from Tarek Tawfik Amin (20)

PPTX
Publishing of an article
PPTX
Blinding in clinical trilas
PPTX
Clincal trails phases
PPTX
Clinical trials designs
PPTX
Scientific writing
PPTX
Bias and confounding
PPTX
Data collection
PPTX
Epidemiology of physical activity in the Middle East
PPT
Cancer Epidemiology part II
PPT
Cancer Epidemiology part I
PPT
Community Diagnosis
PPT
Ebola virus disease
PPT
Linear Correlation
PPT
Plagiarism
PPT
Public awareness
PPT
Health education and adults learning.
PPT
Breast cancer risk factors
PPT
Types of epidemics and epidemic investigations
PPT
Samples Types and Methods
PPSX
Competency based education in Public Health
Publishing of an article
Blinding in clinical trilas
Clincal trails phases
Clinical trials designs
Scientific writing
Bias and confounding
Data collection
Epidemiology of physical activity in the Middle East
Cancer Epidemiology part II
Cancer Epidemiology part I
Community Diagnosis
Ebola virus disease
Linear Correlation
Plagiarism
Public awareness
Health education and adults learning.
Breast cancer risk factors
Types of epidemics and epidemic investigations
Samples Types and Methods
Competency based education in Public Health

Recently uploaded (20)

PPTX
Human Reproduction: Anatomy, Physiology & Clinical Insights.pptx
PDF
Calcified coronary lesions management tips and tricks
PPTX
Hearthhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
PPTX
preoerative assessment in anesthesia and critical care medicine
PDF
OSCE Series Set 1 ( Questions & Answers ).pdf
PDF
The_EHRA_Book_of_Interventional Electrophysiology.pdf
PPT
HIV lecture final - student.pptfghjjkkejjhhge
PDF
Pharmaceutical Regulation -2024.pdf20205939
PPTX
y4d nutrition and diet in pregnancy and postpartum
PPTX
NRP and care of Newborn.pptx- APPT presentation about neonatal resuscitation ...
PDF
OSCE SERIES ( Questions & Answers ) - Set 5.pdf
PPTX
Cardiovascular - antihypertensive medical backgrounds
PPTX
09. Diabetes in Pregnancy/ gestational.pptx
PDF
Comparison of Swim-Up and Microfluidic Sperm Sorting.pdf
PPTX
HYPERSENSITIVITY REACTIONS - Pathophysiology Notes for Second Year Pharm D St...
PPTX
Radiation Dose Management for Patients in Medical Imaging- Avinesh Shrestha
PPT
Rheumatology Member of Royal College of Physicians.ppt
PDF
OSCE SERIES ( Questions & Answers ) - Set 3.pdf
PPTX
Post Op complications in general surgery
PPTX
Enteric duplication cyst, etiology and management
Human Reproduction: Anatomy, Physiology & Clinical Insights.pptx
Calcified coronary lesions management tips and tricks
Hearthhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
preoerative assessment in anesthesia and critical care medicine
OSCE Series Set 1 ( Questions & Answers ).pdf
The_EHRA_Book_of_Interventional Electrophysiology.pdf
HIV lecture final - student.pptfghjjkkejjhhge
Pharmaceutical Regulation -2024.pdf20205939
y4d nutrition and diet in pregnancy and postpartum
NRP and care of Newborn.pptx- APPT presentation about neonatal resuscitation ...
OSCE SERIES ( Questions & Answers ) - Set 5.pdf
Cardiovascular - antihypertensive medical backgrounds
09. Diabetes in Pregnancy/ gestational.pptx
Comparison of Swim-Up and Microfluidic Sperm Sorting.pdf
HYPERSENSITIVITY REACTIONS - Pathophysiology Notes for Second Year Pharm D St...
Radiation Dose Management for Patients in Medical Imaging- Avinesh Shrestha
Rheumatology Member of Royal College of Physicians.ppt
OSCE SERIES ( Questions & Answers ) - Set 3.pdf
Post Op complications in general surgery
Enteric duplication cyst, etiology and management

Screening test (basic concepts)

  • 2. Objectives By the end of the session 4th medical students should be able to: - Identify the difference between diagnostic and screening test. - Identify and recall the pillars of screening test accuracy. - Interpret the output of accuracy parameters of screening test.
  • 3. The patient’s scenario Mrs. Zi has discovered a lump in her left breast. So what?
  • 4. Diagnostic tests: ordered to answer a specific question Diagnostic tests help physicians revise disease probability for their patients. 1. Establish a diagnosis in symptomatic patients. ECG to diagnose ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with chest pain. 2. Screen for disease in asymptomatic patients. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test in men older than 50 years. 3. Provide prognostic information in patients with established disease. CD4 count in patients with HIV. 4. Monitor therapy by either benefits or side effects. Measuring the international normalized ratio (INR) in patients taking warfarin. 5. Confirm that a person is free from a disease. Pregnancy test to exclude the diagnosis of ectopic pregnancy.
  • 5. Criterion (reference test) • The criterion (reference) standard test definitively decides either presence or absence of a disease. Pathological specimens for malignancies and pulmonary angiography for pulmonary embolism. • Criterion standard tests routinely come with drawbacks; expensive, less widely available, and more invasive. Compel physicians to choose other diagnostic tests as surrogates (alternative test). Venography, the criterion standard for vein thrombosis, is an invasive procedure with significant complications [renal failure, allergic reaction, and clot formation]. Venography less desirable than the alternative diagnostic test—venous duplex ultrasonography. • The price most diagnostic tests (surrogates) pay for their ease of use compared with their criterion standard is a decrease in accuracy.
  • 6. Screening Vs. Diagnostic tests • Screening tests are not diagnostic tests • The primary purpose of screening tests is to detect early disease or risk factors for disease in large numbers of apparently healthy individuals. • The purpose of a diagnostic test is to establish the presence (or absence) of disease as a basis for treatment decisions in symptomatic or screen positive individuals (confirmatory test).
  • 7. Screening tests Diagnostic tests 1-To detect potential disease indicators 1- To establish presence/absence of disease 2-Large numbers of asymptomatic, but potentially at risk individuals 2-Symptomatic individuals to establish diagnosis, or asymptomatic individuals with a positive screening test 3-Simple, acceptable to patients and staff 3-Maybe invasive, expensive but justifiable as necessary to establish diagnosis 4-Generally chosen towards high sensitivity not to miss potential disease 4-Chosen towards high specificity (true negatives). More weight given to accuracy and precision than to patient acceptability 5-Essentially indicates suspicion of disease 5- Result provides a definite diagnosis 6-Cheap, benefits should justify the costs since large numbers of people will need to be screened to identify a small number of potential cases 6-Higher costs associated with diagnostic test maybe justified to establish diagnosis.
  • 8. The validity of a screening test: sensitivity and specificity o The measures of sensitivity and specificity describe how well the proposed screening test performs against an agreed 'Gold Standard' test. o In medicine, a gold standard test or criterion standard test is a diagnostic test or benchmark that is regarded as definitive. o The actual gold standard test may be too unpleasant for the patient, too impractical or too expensive to be used widely as a screening test
  • 9. Sensitivity and Specificity • The outcomes of any screening test • The calculations
  • 10. Screening Disease status as determined by 'Gold Standard' Disease No Disease Test positive True positives (a) False positives (b) Total test positives (a+b) → Positive predictive value Test negative False negatives (c) True negatives (d) Total test negatives (c+d) → Negative predictive value Total with disease (a+c) Total without disease (b+d) Total screened (a+b+c+d) ↓ Sensitivity ↓ Specificity True positives = number of individuals with disease and a positive screening test (a) False positives = number of individuals without disease but have a positive screening test (b) False negatives = number of individuals with disease but have a negative screening test (c) True negatives = number of individuals without disease and a negative screening test (d) Missed cases Labeling effect
  • 11. 1-Sensitivity • Sensitivity is defined as the ability of the test to detect all those with disease in the screened population. This is expressed as the proportion of those with disease correctly identified by a positive screening test result • Sensitivity = Number of true positives Total with disease = a/ (a+c)
  • 12. 2-Specificity • Specificity is defined as the ability of the test to identify correctly those free of disease in the screened population. This is expressed as the proportion of those without disease correctly identified by a negative screening test result • Specificity = Number of true negatives Total without disease = d/ (b+d)
  • 13. 3-Positive Predictive Value • The positive predictive value (PPV) describes the probability of having the disease given a positive screening test result in the screened population. • How many of +ve (s) at screening are actually having the disease? This is expressed as the proportion of those with disease among all screening test positives. • PPV = Number of true positives total test positives PPV = a / (a+b)
  • 14. 4-Negative Predictive Value • The negative predictive value (NPV) describes the probability of not having the disease given a negative screening test result in the screened population. • How many of –ve (S) are not diseased? This is expressed as the proportion of those without disease among all screening test negatives. • NPV = Number of true negatives total test negatives NPV= d / (c+d)
  • 15. Disease Prevalence Effect • Sensitivity and specificity are independent of prevalence of disease, i.e. test specific (they describe how well the screening test performs against the gold standard). • PPV and NPV however are disease prevalence dependant, i.e. population specific. PPV and NPV give information on how well a test screening test will perform in a given population with known prevalence. • Generally a higher prevalence will increase the PPV and
  • 16. Example A new ELISA (antibody test) is developed to diagnose HIV infections. Serum from 10,000 patients that were positive by Western Blot (the Gold Standard assay) was tested, and 9,990 were found to be positive by the new ELISA screening test. The manufacturers then used the ELISA to test serum from 10,000 nuns who denied risk factors for HIV infection. 9,990 were negative and the 10
  • 17. HIV [Nuns and HIV patients] Infected Not infected ELISA test + 9,990 (a) 10 (b) - 10 (c) 9,990 (d) 10,000 (a+c) 10,000 (b+d) Sensitivity = a/(a+c) = 9990/(9990+10) = 99.9% Specificity= b/(b+d) = 9990/(9990+10) = 99.9% Excellent test
  • 18. On population level The test is applied to a million people where 1% are infected with HIV (assuming the sensitivity and specificity remain the same). Of the million people, 10,000 would be infected with HIV. Since the new ELISA is 99.9% sensitive, the test will detect 9,990 (true positives) people who are actually infected and miss 10 (false negative). Looking at those numbers the test appears very good because it detected 9,990 out of 10,000 HIV infected people. But there is another side to the test. Of the 1 million people in this population, 990,000 are not infected. Looking at the test results of the HIV negative population (the specificity of the assay is 99.9%), 989,010 are found to be not
  • 19. 1% Prevalence HIV Infected Not infected Test + 9990 (a) 990 (b) Test positives a+b PPV= a/(a+b) = 9990/(9990+990) =91% - 10 (c) 989,010 (d) Test negatives c+d NPV= d/(c+d) =989,010/ (10+989,010) = 99.9% HIV positive 10,000 HIV negative 999,000 Total screened= a+b+c+d Sensitivity = 99,9% Specificity = 99,9% Sensitivity and specificity are not the only performance features because they do not address the problems of the prevalence of disease in different populations. For that, the understanding of the positive and negative predictive value is crucial.
  • 20. Blood donors have already been screened for HIV risk factors before they are allowed to donate blood, so that the HIV sero-prevalence in this population is closer to 0.1% instead of 1%. For every 1,000,000 blood donors, 1,000 are HIV positive. With a sensitivity of 99.9%, the ELISA would pick up 999 of those thousand, but would fail to pick up one HIV sero- positive individual. Of the 999,000 uninfected individuals, the test would label 998,001 individuals assero-negative (true negatives).
  • 21. Blood donors 0.1% Prevalence HIV + - Test + 999 (a) 999 (b) Test positives 1,998 PPV= a/(a+b) =50% - 1 (c) 998,001 (d) Test negatives 998,002 NPV= d/(c+d) =99.999% HIV positive 1000 HIV negative 999,000 Total a+b+c+d Sensitivity 99.9% Specificity 99.9%
  • 22. • The second population consists of former IV drug users attending drug rehabilitation units, with a prevalence of 10%. For a million of these individuals, 100,000 would be HIV-infected and 900,000 would be HIV negative.
  • 24. • The sensitivity and specificity of the test has not changed. It is just that the predictive value of the test has changed depending on the population being tested. • The positive predictive value is how many of the test-positives truly have the disease. In the first example with a 1% sero-positive rate, the ELISA has a positive predictive value of 0.91 (91%). When Remarks
  • 25. Rema rks Although the sensitivity of the ELISA does not change between populations, the positive predictive value changes drastically from only half the people that tested positive being truly positive in a low- incidence population to 99% of the people testing positive being truly positive in the high- prevalence population. The negative predictive value of the
  • 27. Term Calculation Plain English True positive (TP) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients with the disease who have a positive test result True negative (TN) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients without the disease who have a negative test result False positive (FP) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients without the disease who have a positive test result False negative (FN) Counts in 2 X 2 table # Patients with the disease who have a negative test result Sensitivity = True positive rate (TPR) TP / (TP + FN) The probability that a patient with the disease will have a positive test result 1 - Sensitivity = False-negative rate (FPR) FN / (TP + FN) The probability that a patient with the disease will have a negative test result Specificity = True negative rate (TNR) TN / (TN + FP) The probability that a patient without the disease will have a negative test result 1 - Specificity = False-positive rate (FPR) FP / (TN + FP) The probability that a patient without the disease will have a positive test result Positive predictive value TP / (TP + FP) The probability that a patient with a positive test result will have the disease Negative predictive value TN / (TN + FN) The probability that a patient with a negative test result will not have the disease. Accuracy (TP + TN) / (TP + TN + FP + FN) The probability that the results of a test will accurately predict presence or absence of disease Bayes’ theorem Posttest Odds = Pretest Odds X Likelihood Ratio The odds of having or not having the disease after testing Likelihood ratio of a positive test result (LR+) Sensitivity / (1 - Specificity) The increase in the odds of having the disease after a positive test result Likelihood ratio of a negative test result (LR-) (1 - Sensitivity) / Specificity The decrease in the odds of having the disease after a negative test result