Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 13 views

    Tutorial 7 Agus Salim Arsyad

    Uploaded by

    sugamilas
    This document summarizes the results of two hypothetical HIV screening tests (HIV1 and HIV2) compared to a gold standard test on a population of 1000 people with an HIV prevalence of 14.5%. The HIV1 test had a sensitivity of 99.5%, specificity of 99.8%, positive predictive value of 83.26%, and negative predictive value of 99.8%. There was 1 false negative and 40 false positives. The HIV2 test had lower sensitivity (61.7%) and negative predictive value (89.4%) but higher specificity (99.3%) and positive predictive value (96.66%). There were 5 false positives and 90 false negatives. False negatives are a greater concern for blood screening

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Tutorial 7 Agus Salim Arsyad

    Uploaded by

    sugamilas
    13 views3 pages
    This document summarizes the results of two hypothetical HIV screening tests (HIV1 and HIV2) compared to a gold standard test on a population of 1000 people with an HIV prevalence of 14.5%. The HIV1 test had a sensitivity of 99.5%, specificity of 99.8%, positive predictive value of 83.26%, and negative predictive value of 99.8%. There was 1 false negative and 40 false positives. The HIV2 test had lower sensitivity (61.7%) and negative predictive value (89.4%) but higher specificity (99.3%) and positive predictive value (96.66%). There were 5 false positives and 90 false negatives. False negatives are a greater concern for blood screening

    Original Description:

    tutor

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes the results of two hypothetical HIV screening tests (HIV1 and HIV2) compared to a gold standard test on a population of 1000 people with an HIV prevalence of 14.5%. The HIV1 test had a sensitivity of 99.5%, specificity of 99.8%, positive predictive value of 83.26%, and negative predictive value of 99.8%. There was 1 false negative and 40 false positives. The HIV2 test had lower sensitivity (61.7%) and negative predictive value (89.4%) but higher specificity (99.3%) and positive predictive value (96.66%). There were 5 false positives and 90 false negatives. False negatives are a greater concern for blood screening

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    13 views3 pages

    Tutorial 7 Agus Salim Arsyad

    Uploaded by

    sugamilas
    This document summarizes the results of two hypothetical HIV screening tests (HIV1 and HIV2) compared to a gold standard test on a population of 1000 people with an HIV prevalence of 14.5%. The HIV1 test had a sensitivity of 99.5%, specificity of 99.8%, positive predictive value of 83.26%, and negative predictive value of 99.8%. There was 1 false negative and 40 false positives. The HIV2 test had lower sensitivity (61.7%) and negative predictive value (89.4%) but higher specificity (99.3%) and positive predictive value (96.66%). There were 5 false positives and 90 false negatives. False negatives are a greater concern for blood screening

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Tutorial 7

    Screening and diagnosis test


    Activity 1
    In a hypothetical study regarding HIV screening in a population with HIV prevalence
    below 30% in people with clinical sign, we would like to test the validity of 2 HIV
    screening test. We screen 1000 people using 2 kind of screening test (HIV1 and HIV2)
    and a gold standard (HIV-gold). In the first screening using HIV1, we found 761 people
    negative for HIV using HIV1 and 200 people were positive using HIV-gold. There were 760
    people among 761 that was also negative using HIV-gold.
    Test Result
    HIV1
    Positive
    Negative
    Total

    HIV gold
    Positive
    199
    1
    200

    total

    Negative
    40
    760
    800

    239
    761
    1000

    1. How many people had positive result by using HIV-1?


    Answer: 199
    2. How many false positive and false negative found?
    False Positif
    = 40
    False Negative
    =1
    3. What are the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of
    the HIV-1 test?
    Sensitivity = a / a+c x 100% = 199 / 199+1 = 199/200 x 100 = 99,5%
    Specificity = d / b+d x 100% =760/761 x 100% = 99,8%
    Positive predictive value = a / a+b x 100% = 199 / 239 x 100% = 83,26%
    Negative predictive value = d / b+d x 100% = 760 / 761 x 100% = 99,8 %
    4. What is the prevalence for HIV in this population?
    In the second screening using HIV-2, we found 850 people negative using HIV-2.
    There were 145 people positive for HIV2 and HIV-gold.
    Answer:
    145
    Prevalen = 1000 x100 = 14,5%
    Test Result
    HIV2
    Positive
    Negative
    Total

    HIV gold

    total

    Positive

    Negative

    145
    90
    235

    5
    760
    765

    150
    850
    1000

    5. How many people had false positive and false negative result?

    Answer:
    False Positive
    False Negative

    = 1000-(850+145) = 5
    = 850-760 = 90

    6. What are the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of
    the HIV-2 test?
    Sensitivity = a / a+c x 100% = 145 / 235 100% = 61,7%
    760
    Specificity = d / b+d x100%=
    765 100 = 99,3%

    Positive predictive value =a / a+b x 100% =

    145
    150

    760
    Negative predictive value = d / b+d x100 = 850

    100 = 96,66%
    100 = 89,4%

    7. Between false positive and negative, which one need the most attention in HIV
    screening for blood donor or transfusion? Explain your answer
    Answer: Lebih baik False Positif karena kalau false negatif , karena false negatif itu
    adalah berpenyakit setelah di tes diagnosis
    8. Which test is better for the first and second test in a two stage diagnostic of HIV?
    Explain the reason for choosing the test
    HIV 2 : Untuk melihat mana yang lebih untuk diagnosis kita membandingkan nilai Positif
    Predictive Value,
    Activity 2
    Two physicians were asked to classify 100 chests X ray as abnormal or normalindependently.
    The comparison of their classification is shown in following table:
    Clasification of chest X-Ray by Physician 1 compared with Physician 2
    Physician 1
    Physician 2
    Total
    Abnormal
    Normal
    Abnormal
    40
    20
    60
    Normal
    10
    30
    40
    Total
    50
    50
    100
    1. The simple, overall percent agreement between two physicians out of the total is
    Jawaban :
    a+d
    Overal Percent Observed
    = a+b+c+d 100
    40+30
    = 40+20+10+30
    70
    = 100
    = 70%

    100

    100

    2. The overall percent agreement between the two physicians, removing the X-rays that both
    physicians classified as normal is
    Jawaban :
    a
    Percent Agreement Expected
    = a+b+c 100
    40
    = 40+20+10
    40
    = 70

    100

    100

    = 57%
    3. The value kappa is:
    Jawaban :
    Percent Agreement Expected
    c+d
    a+b+c+d

    =(

    a+b
    a+b+c+d

    a+b
    a+b+c+d

    )+(

    b+d
    a+b+c+d

    )
    60
    = ( 100

    50
    100

    50
    ) + ( 100

    40
    100

    = (0,6 0,5) + (0,5 0,4)


    = 0,3 + 0,2
    = 0,5

    ( Percent Agreement Observed ) - (Percent Agreement Expected)


    Kappa = 1 - (Percent Agreement Expected)
    0,7 - 0,5
    = 1 - 0,5
    0,2
    = 0,5
    = 0,4
    4. This kappa represents which kind agreement? ( excellent or intermediate to good or poor)
    Jawaban :
    kappa of 0.40 to 0.75 represents intermediate to good agreement.

    You might also like