George Rebane
Trigger warning: The contents of this commentary may not be accessible to the innumerate reader.
As explained in โTesting, testing, โฆโ, the value of testing comes to the fore when you have a sufficiently reliable test that can be administered on a regular and scientific basis over a suspect population. In that case, it could be used to identify concentrations of infections that can be used for a more satisficing allocation of limited healthcare resources. In an update to the referenced commentary, I illustrated how to determine the reliability of test results given the reliability parameters of the test administered to a walk-in member of a suspect population (country, state, county, city, region, โฆ).
In this piece I will answer the questions many reasonable people have about testing โ โwhy test if the tests are unreliable? Why test if the test only provides a snapshot assessment which may change within the next hour?โ We start by recalling the advice from our federal and state medicos. Given the limited availability of tests and processing labs, we are only supposed to request a test if we are symptomatic โ fever, cough, headache, โฆ . Donโt burden the system if you are asymptomatic.
To read the remainder of this analytical commentary full of some algebra and all kinds of numbers, please download this PDF – Download The Value of Testing


Leave a comment