Understanding Screening and Diagnostic Test

University
Specificity, Sensitivity, and Predictive values in Disease Control
Student’s Name
Date
Professor’s Name
Program of Study
Specificity, Sensitivity, and Predictive values in Disease Control
Screening tests and diagnostic tests are the key aspects of assessing people’s health. One of the critical benefits of diagnostic tests is to provide definitive insight regarding the availability or absence of target illness. Similarly, screening tests are equally relevant in detecting diseases in individuals without any symptoms of an illness. Therefore, health practitioners are relevant in determining the extent that tests are appropriate in identifying the presence or absence of a condition. In such a case, health practitioners make relevant decisions regarding the control of illnesses. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values are appropriate in determining the accuracy of screening and diagnostic tests concerning a relative standard. According to Trevethan (2017, p. 307), a diagnostic test’s relevance is to detect an individual with an underlying condition and exclude those without an illness. One of the critical objectives of a diagnostic test is to use results in executing a diagnosis and, thus, the need to realise the probability that results can provide the proper diagnosis. While positive predictive value (PPV) entails the proportion of people who have an illness, a negative predictive value (NPV) of a test entails the proportion of individuals with a negative test, thus having no underlying condition.
The critical focus of sensitivity and specificity aspects is on screening test accuracy based on a relative standard. In such a case, the focus is on screening tests adequacy or related ultimate credentials. However, healthcare providers ought to consider if or not screening test yields positive results. Sensitivity and specificity are critical indicators of the effectiveness of a test concerning an outside referent. Although one of the essential tasks is to have high specificity and sensitivity tests, the values of the critical metrics should not be part of the decision-making process (Trevethan 2017, p. 307). The lack of communication on specificity, sensitivity, and predictive values results in inconsistent patterns of entries. Notably, sensitivity fails to make informed decisions since even positive results might have biased information. However, it fails to provide an appropriate indicator of the negative screening test. For that reason, a negative impact of a screening examination with outstanding sensitivity is not relevant in ruling out an illness among patients.
Confusion of the inverse is a contributing factor to the failure of appreciating significant constraints on specificity and sensitivity. Most hospitals realize the gaps in believing that positive result on a sensitive test reveals an underlying condition among patients. According to Bernitza et al. (2019, p. 167), the susceptible test provides a positive result to reveal the presence of an illness. Specificity and sensitivity are relevant if only they are high enough. A high specificity indicates the presence of an underlying condition, especially if a diagnostic test yields positive results (Carter et al. 2017,...