Quotient vs Quindel Sensitivity12 May 2020 23:12
Researching Quotient vs Quindel test ...
Looking at the definition
Sensitivity = True Positives / (True Positives + False Negatives)
if Sensitivity of the Quotient test is 100% then False Negatives =0%.
Also the Quotient test has good Specificity where Specificity = True Negatives / (True Negatives + False Positives) implying that the there are a low number of False Positives, so that if the test says you are positive you very probably are.
It is the Quindel test, with its low Sensitivity that will give lots of false negatives.
However, if the Quindel test gives a positive result then it is very likely to be correct, so that the Quindel test is useful because it can reduce the need for, hopefully properly done, Nasopharyngeal tests on all the people who test negative with the Quindel test.
Addmittedly the overall test approach that does have the high false negative rate is the Nasopharyngeal test, not because the lab processing part of the process is inaccurate, but because of the difficulty of doing the swab properly, which is why I said 'hopefully properly done' previously.
Quotient can do 30,000 tests a day, which in the present conditions is not to be sneezed at. If I were the government I would be placing a definite contract so they could have the machines to scale up at the end of the year. I would do this on the basis of, 'A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush'. Ok there might be some money lost, if, and it is a big 'if', better tests are developed, but we just have to go for the scattergun approach in the hope of getting things that work at scale.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
