Cited by 23SARS-CoV-2 detection and testingCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies

The Impact of Increasing Disease Prevalence, False Omissions, and Diagnostic Uncertainty on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Test Performance

Open access
Kost, Gerald J.·2021·Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine

Abstract

CONTEXT.—: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) test performance depends on predictive values in settings of increasing disease prevalence. Geospatially distributed diagnostics with minimal uncertainty facilitate efficient point-of-need strategies. OBJECTIVES.—: To use original mathematics to interpret COVID-19 test metrics; assess US Food and Drug Administration Emergency Use Authorizations and Health Canada targets; compare predictive values for multiplex, antigen, polymerase chain reaction kit, point-of-care antibody, and home tests; enhance test performance; and improve decision-making. DESIGN.—: PubMed/newsprint-generated articles documenting prevalence. Mathematica and open access software helped perform recursive calculations, graph multivariate relationships, and visualize performance by comparing predictive value geometric mean-squared patterns. RESULTS.—: Tiered sensitivity/specificity comprised: T1, 90%, 95%; T2, 95%, 97.5%; and T3, 100%, ≥99%. Tier 1 false negatives exceeded true negatives at >90.5% prevalence; false positives exceeded true positives at <5.3% prevalence. High-sensitivity/specificity tests reduced false negatives and false positives, yielding superior predictive values. Recursive testing improved predictive values. Visual logistics facilitated test comparisons. Antigen test quality fell off as prevalence increased. Multiplex severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV-2)*influenza A/B*respiratory syncytial virus testing performed reasonably well compared with tier 3. Tier 3 performance with a tier 2 confidence band lower limit will generate excellent performance and reliability. CONCLUSIONS.—: The overriding principle is to select the best combined performance and reliability pattern for the prevalence bracket. Some public health professionals recommend repetitive testing to compensate for low sensitivity. More logically, improved COVID-19 assays with less uncertainty conserve resources. Multiplex differentiation of COVID-19 from influenza A/B-respiratory syncytial virus represents an effective strategy if seasonal flu surges next year.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5858/arpa.2020-0716-sa

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Tiered sensitivity/specificity comprise Tier-1 90%/95%, Tier-2 95%/97.5%, Tier-3 100%/≥99%.

    “Tiered sensitivity/speci fi city comprise: Tier-1) 90 %, 95 %; Tier-2) 95 %, 97.5 %; and Tier-3) 100 %, ≥ 99 %, respectively [74 -77].”

    From Point-of-care testing: state-of-the art and perspectives (2025) · cites this paper as [75]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kost, G. J.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Kost, Gerald J.
Venue
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
Published
2021-03-08
Volume
145
Issue
7
Pages
797-813
ISSN
  • 0003-9985 (ISSN-L)
  • 1543-2165
OpenAlex
W3134030341
Cited by
23
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 9
FWCI
1.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Fulbright Program
  • University of California, Davis
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2, diagnostic performance, disease prevalence, predictive value, false-negative results, false positives, diagnostic uncertainty, point-of-care testing, home testing, antigen testing, multiplex PCR, influenza A/B, respiratory syncytial virus, emergency use authorization, sensitivity and specificity
MeSH terms
COVID-19, COVID-19 Testing, Canada, False Negative Reactions, False Positive Reactions, Humans, Predictive Value of Tests, Sensitivity and Specificity, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Prevalence, Point-of-Care Systems, Uncertainty

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review