Abstract
<h3>In Reply.—</h3> Several individuals have called our attention to an unfortunate error in typing that led to publication of an incorrect Table 1. The correct version, as they have all pointed out, is as shown (Table). Drs Woodruff and Baron make an important point in noting that predictive values (which we termed<i>clinical accuracy</i>in an attempt to make it more understandable to those not expert in decision theory) are sensitive to changes in prevalence. As a matter of fact, predictive values were added to the manuscript in response to the suggestion of one of the reviewers, who remarked that their use would be acceptable, so long as they were not going to be directly applied in the screening of other populations. In some of the diseases we studied, there was a marked change inprevalence (as in the case of tuberculosis) that accounted for much of the change in
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
