An interesting article in the Washington Post. "Doctors are surprisingly bad at reading lab results. It’s putting us all at risk."
We talk a lot here about testing of different kinds, but does your doctor really know how to interpret the results they are looking at?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... l-at-risk/
Food for thought.
What the Tests Don't Show
Re: What the Tests Don't Show
It is excellent food for thought. No test is the end all and be all. Many providers reflex to overtesting to avoid lawsuits, resulting in unnecessary cost and potential for harm to the patient. I see this in older doctors as well as younger ones.
Slacker
E4/E4
E4/E4
Re: What the Tests Don't Show
Yep very discouraging....feeds into my already skeptical mind.
Re: What the Tests Don't Show
I got to reading the comments and found this one particularly disconcerting, although her conclusion could be more fear mongering than anything:
As a medical laboratory scientist (MLS) who performs the laboratory tests your physician orders, these assay and population statistics (e.g. sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV) can easily become meaningless if the tests are not properly controlled for quality and performed by competent scientists. As more and more MLS schools close daily and "anybody can push a button" mentality increases, the result posted on your medical chart may not even be from your sample.
ApoE 3/4 > Thanks in advance for any responses made to my posts.
Re: What the Tests Don't Show
Yep, this has been a problem.
Re: What the Tests Don't Show
In my previous life I worked in a hospital doing medical tests. One point overlooked in the article is the tendency of all of us to do more and more tests. But if the false positive rate on a test is 5% (typical, as the article says), then repeating the test multiplies the rate. If you do 20 tests, how many false positives?
The false positive rate also depends on the prevalence of the condition tested in the subjects tested. The true rate of Alzheimer's Disease is unknown, as maybe a third are falsely diagnosed and not autopsied. Thus the sensitivity and specificity of tests for AD prior to autopsy are still investigated.
I also had the chance to attend Grand Rounds, where a resident presented a significant case and reported the test results, then discussed by a specialist, and then both of them skewered by the pathologist who delivered the solemn and often surprising conclusion. That seems a better way of checking test results than whether or not the result is consistent with a repeat or other tests.
But too many of us don't donate our brains, and there are not enough pathologists, for this confirmation.
The false positive rate also depends on the prevalence of the condition tested in the subjects tested. The true rate of Alzheimer's Disease is unknown, as maybe a third are falsely diagnosed and not autopsied. Thus the sensitivity and specificity of tests for AD prior to autopsy are still investigated.
I also had the chance to attend Grand Rounds, where a resident presented a significant case and reported the test results, then discussed by a specialist, and then both of them skewered by the pathologist who delivered the solemn and often surprising conclusion. That seems a better way of checking test results than whether or not the result is consistent with a repeat or other tests.
But too many of us don't donate our brains, and there are not enough pathologists, for this confirmation.
