ONS just announced weekly infection rate in secondary school aged children is 0.43%.

Yesterday Test-and-Trace data showed 0.047% of LFTs were positive.

How can we get an estimate of the sensitivity of LFTs from this? I’ve come up with sensitivity=10%

Here are my workings
Three issues

#1 0.047% will include LFT false positives – 0.03% according to DHSC, so 0.017% will be LFT true positives.

#2 0.43% will include PCR false positives – lets go for 1 in 1000 (probably less) to be conservative. So 0.33% will be true cases
#3 ONS data are based on number of children, LFT on number of tests. If assume two tests per week (but only ever one positive per child) then double the rate to 0.034%

So sensitivity seems to be about 0.034/0.33 = 10%

Anybody else want to present a version of these figures?
I guess we probably also need to adjust for the asymp / symp spread (not so sure about this as LFTs are claimed to detect the infection before symptoms). If we presume 50% in children are asymptomatic this could double to 20%. Still not thrilling.
The thought that this is probably the best data we have on the sensitivity of Innova in children though is rather terrifying.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jon Deeks 💙

Jon Deeks 💙 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @deeksj

25 Mar
LFT test results for week to 17th Mar

Flatlining – few cases in schools - costing tons of money - causing many FPs

7.6M tests week, up from 6.3M
@£5 per test=£38M
@£20 (real cost reported from Wales)=£152M

To get 8279 +ve results (0.108% yellow line) many of which will be FP
What happened in secondary schools?

3.9M tests in students, 1805 positive results.

1 in 2140+ve (previous week 1 in 2070).

Would expect 1160 false+ve if 99.97% specificity (Government’s new claim)

64% of +ves were false+ve with kids+bubbles+families isolating unnecessarily
Overall we’ve been above 1000 tests to find one true positive for the past fortnight using the 99.97% specificity figure,

and for 3 weeks using the slightly 99.9% specificity figure.

“Finding needles in haystacks”
Read 5 tweets
24 Mar
Updated @cochranecollab review of Rapid Tests for Covid-19 is here

Rapid, point‐of‐care antigen and molecular‐based tests for diagnosis of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection - @jacdinnes @deeksj - 2021 | Cochrane Library

cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.10…

1/12
Update included electronic searches to end of Sept, and other resource up to mid Nov 2020. Next update is already underway. Many thanks to the great crowd of people involved in putting this together.

2/12
Included both lateral flow antigen tests – data on 16 tests (of 92 with regulatory approval) in 48 studies (n=20,168)

And rapid molecular tests – data on 5 tests (of 43 with regulatory approval) in 30 studies (n=3,919)

3/12
Read 12 tweets
22 Mar
More disappointing data on sensitivity of LFT for mass testing - this time from Wales.

This report includes data from mass testing Nov-Dec
cwmtafmorgannwg.wales/whole-area-tes…

I think it is with Innova but report does not actually say.

(Note: sens/spec calculations in the report are wrong)
Data from Merthyr Tydfil

You can't compute sens and spec directly from this (but the authors did) as only 2.1% of LFT -ves were included compared to 42% of LFT +ves

Correcting for sampling fraction
sensitivity is 17.5%
specificty is 99.7%
Data from the lower Cynon Valley

Again their is a sampling issue with
4.1% of LFT-ves being verified compared with 59.1% of LFT +ves.

Sensitivity 25.6%
Specificity 99.6%
Read 4 tweets
22 Mar
Sorry - but there is a dreadful mistake made in computing the sensitivity and specificty of LFT in this report. If you look at Figure 32 (day 1 for example) the estimates of sens and spec are based on a subsample of the study with 364 LFT+ve and 686 LFT -ve. 34.7% are LFT+VE
However, in the whole sample 33,315 LFD tests were completed across 12 centres. Of these, 763 were positive, representing a positivity rate of 2.3%.

Thus the sample used in the test accuracy study is biased to include many more LFT+ves (34.7% compared to 2.3%).
This means overcounting of true positives and false positives, undercounting of true negatives and false negatives - but a large order of magnitude.

Sensitivity and specificity estimates are badly affected
Read 8 tweets
18 Mar
Data on TESTING in SCHOOLS

Results just published to 10th March (;ast Wednesday)
2.8 million tests in secondary school kids, 1324 positives- 0.048% or 1 in 2086. Lowest rate ever observed

Government figures would have predicted around 10,000.
Will post more analysis shortly
Using the Government figures from @ab4scambs conservativehome.com/platform/2021/…

Sens=50.1% Spec 99.7% Prevalence of 0.5%
of 2,762,775 tests we would expect 6921 true positives and 825 false positives - nearly 6 times more test positives than have been reported.
To get down to the 1324 positives actually observed, either the prevalence has to be 0.036% (1 fourteenth of the expected rate) - 36 per 100,000
Read 5 tweets
16 Mar
Great that @ab4scambs shows some MPs understand the laws of probability (beginning to doubt that there was one) but this justification why we don't need to PCR kids who have positive LFT sadly starts with a fatal flaw

1/8

conservativehome.com/platform/2021/…
This is the second time I have tweeted this as one decimal place went for a wander in my first set of tweets. Nothing else changes. Thanks to @d_spiegel for spotting it.

2/8
It presumes that the prevalence to use for Covid infection in these calculations is that in the general population - 0.5% or 1 in 200. And then shows that 30% of those who are LFT+ and then PCR - will still have Covid infection. Can you spot the error?

3/8
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!