Volume 10, Number 1, January 2004

Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response

Dena M. Bravata,*† Vandana Sundaram,*†‡ Kathryn M. McDonald,*† Wendy M. Smith,*† Herbert Szeto,*†§ Mark D. Schleinitz,¶# and Douglas K. Owens*†‡
*University of California San Francisco-Stanford Evidence-based Practice Center, Stanford, California, USA; †Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA; ‡VA Palo Alto Healthcare System, Palo Alto, California, USA; §Kaiser Permanente, Redwood City, California, USA; ¶Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island, USA; and #Brown University School of Medicine, Providence, Rhode Island, USA

Figure 1. Effect of sensitivity, specificity, and pretest probability on posttest probability of anthrax’s being present. Upper curves show the posttest probability of anthrax’s being present after a positive detection or diagnostic test result. Lower curves show the posttest probability of anthrax’s being present after a negative detection or diagnostic test result. Separate curves are drawn for two diagnostic tests described in the text: one with 99% sensitivity and 99% specificity (thick) and another with 96% sensitivity and 94% specificity (thin). The arrow marks a pretest probability of disease of 0.0014, which relates to the example described in the text.

EID Home | Top of Page | Ahead-of-Print | Past Issues | Suggested Citation | EID Search | Contact Us | Accessibility | Privacy Policy Notice | CDC Home | CDC Search | Health Topics A-Z

This page last reviewed December 17, 2003

Emerging Infectious Diseases Journal
National Center for Infectious Diseases
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention