Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Intervals for posttest probabilities: a comparison of 5 methods.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Mossman, D; Berger, JO
Published in: Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making
November 2001

Several medical articles discuss methods of constructing confidence intervals for single proportions and the likelihood ratio, but scant attention has been given to the systematic study of intervals for the posterior odds, or the positive predictive value, of a test.The authors describe 5 methods of constructing confidence intervals for posttest probabilities when estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and the pretest probability of a disorder are derived from empirical data. They then evaluate each method to determine how well the intervals' coverage properties correspond to their nominal value.When the estimates of pretest probabilities, sensitivity, and specificity are derived from more than 80 subjects and are not close to 0 or 1, all methods generate intervals with appropriate coverage properties. When these conditions are not met, however, the best-performing method is an objective Bayesian approach implemented by a simple simulation using a spreadsheet.Physicians and investigators can generate accurate confidence intervals for posttest probabilities in small-sample situations using the objective Bayesian approach.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

DOI

EISSN

1552-681X

ISSN

0272-989X

Publication Date

November 2001

Volume

21

Issue

6

Start / End Page

498 / 507

Related Subject Headings

  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Probability
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Likelihood Functions
  • Humans
  • Health Policy & Services
  • Diagnosis
  • Confidence Intervals
  • Bayes Theorem
  • 4206 Public health
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Mossman, D., & Berger, J. O. (2001). Intervals for posttest probabilities: a comparison of 5 methods. Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 21(6), 498–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x0102100608
Mossman, D., and J. O. Berger. “Intervals for posttest probabilities: a comparison of 5 methods.Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making 21, no. 6 (November 2001): 498–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989x0102100608.
Mossman D, Berger JO. Intervals for posttest probabilities: a comparison of 5 methods. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 2001 Nov;21(6):498–507.
Mossman, D., and J. O. Berger. “Intervals for posttest probabilities: a comparison of 5 methods.Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, vol. 21, no. 6, Nov. 2001, pp. 498–507. Epmc, doi:10.1177/0272989x0102100608.
Mossman D, Berger JO. Intervals for posttest probabilities: a comparison of 5 methods. Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. 2001 Nov;21(6):498–507.
Journal cover image

Published In

Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

DOI

EISSN

1552-681X

ISSN

0272-989X

Publication Date

November 2001

Volume

21

Issue

6

Start / End Page

498 / 507

Related Subject Headings

  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Probability
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Likelihood Functions
  • Humans
  • Health Policy & Services
  • Diagnosis
  • Confidence Intervals
  • Bayes Theorem
  • 4206 Public health