Abstract
Two contrasting errors in spirometric interpretation are the inappropriate conclusion of "normality" (type I) and of "abnormality" (type II). A survey of 67 health professionals showed major interpersonal and intersituational differences in opinion about the optimal relative proportions of type I and type II errors. This suggests the need for caution in the commonly employed practice of interpretation based on a 5 percent false positive rate.
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
