Implications of the impact of prevalence on test thresholds and outcomes: lessons from tuberculosis

@DrPops3 @UbuntuForever @jillian_swaine @LucyDownes22 @yycwander @YouAreLobbyLud No I haven't. https://t.co/3TNHnMVWLb And the flipside is also why RATs without clear guidance are a bad idea where there is high prevalence. 1/2

https://t.co/wKGNEPLvgp

@ciarakellydoc Look into this Ciara: at low prevalence levels, even a small false positive rate on PCR becomes greatly amplified, such that the real false posirive rate is greater than 50%- paper here: https://t.co/nhmjXJCjQY.

@Nick_Crossland @CoronavirusPlu2 It's only significant if the positives are really positive- what I'm telling you is that at 3% prevalence, most positive tests are false positives! Have a look at this paper if you don't believe me! https://t.co/nhmjXJCjQY.