Recent Blog Articles
I’m too young to have Alzheimer’s disease or dementia, right?
Asking about guns in houses where your child plays
Behavioral weight loss interventions: Do they work in primary care?
Who needs treatment for ocular hypertension?
The popularity of microdosing of psychedelics: What does the science say?
AFM: A scary polio-like illness
When can women with early-stage breast cancer skip radiation after lumpectomy?
Palliative care frightens some people: Here’s how it helps
The case of the bad placebo
Taking up adaptive sports
Which test is best for COVID-19?
- By Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing
About the Author
Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing
As a service to our readers, Harvard Health Publishing provides access to our library of archived content. Please note the date of last review or update on all articles.
No content on this site, regardless of date, should ever be used as a substitute for direct medical advice from your doctor or other qualified clinician.
Is the definition of false positives and false negatives correct? Usually false positives are defined as the possibility of a positive test result given one does not have the disease, not the possibility of one does not have the virus given a positive test result. (Sorry if this is confusing, I am looking at this from a statistics point of view and am trying to do some basic calculations, but I understand if this article is made to be understood more easily)
Hi, Alex – thanks for your question. Yes, the definitions of false-positives and false-negatives are correct but I agree, the language around this can be confusing. For false-positive results, it’s the situation in which someone who doesn’t have the disease but has a positive test result; this can also be stated the other way around: a positive test result for someone who doesn’t have the disease.
They are not probabilities (or “possibilities” as in your question) – they rely on knowing the test result and diagnosis and are based on sensitivity (positive test results among all who have the disease) and specificity (negative test results among all who don’t have the disease). A highly sensitive test has a low false-negative rate. A highly specific test has a low false-positive rate. As examples: For a test with 90% sensitivity, the false-negative rate is 10%. If the specificity is 98%, the false-positive rate is 2%.
You may be thinking of predictive value – these are probabilities in which you’re starting with a test result (not a diagnosis) and looking at the liklihood that the diagnosis is present. For example, how likely is it that a person with a positive test has the disease (positive predictive value)? Or, what’s the chance that a person with a negative result does not have the disease (negative predictive value)?
I hope this helps!
Thank you! This clear and concise assessment of current testing options was very helpful as my family decides how to proceed after a possible exposure.
Thanks for the COVID-19 testing summary. It’s becoming increasingly frustrating to remain optimistic as I seek an accurate rapid test kit for my family. Reading articles about how every Fisher Island resident in Florida has been tested (along with staff) and watching Dr. Vin Gupta praise an actual test kit (but couldn’t voice the company’s name). The punches to the gut continue in the capitalistic system that takes care of those who have the most 1st, 2nd, and 3rd! I’m married, in my late 50s, parents and in-laws living, 4 kids, and 2 grandkids; I can only hold and love on my wife and youngest child. Like many others, I can afford to purchase whichever rapid test I deem the most suitable for my family’s needs. The age old American SOP of I’m not important enough, or sick enough to qualify me to be in that exclusive circle. As an American living in the world’s largest capitalistic society, I should have access to the same products as those deemed the wealthiest and or the most important. So, is America really as capitalistic as portrayed? What a dangerous, empathy lacking, selfish, and very hypocritical time the majority of Americans find ourselves currently living.
Thanks for allowing me to vent and thanks again for explaining the various testing methods in laymen terminology.
Thanks for the information
Commenting has been closed for this post.
You might also be interested in…
Harvard Health Online
Get all four newsletters, plus more! Subscribe to Harvard Health Online for immediate access to health news and information from the doctors and experts at Harvard Medical School. Any time, day or night, you'll be able to research any health condition or disease, see what your symptoms could mean, research recent test results, read about the latest nutrition and fitness concepts... all from Harvard Medical School. You'll also get electronic subscriptions to all four Harvard health newsletters.
Free Healthbeat Signup
Get the latest in health news delivered to your inbox!