![]() | Statistics Template‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Medicine Template‑class | ||||||
|
The endoscopy example appears to be a real-world one. Please link to a source for it. If it is not real, it would be very useful to find a real-world example to use. I'd like to know the numerical levels for at least one real-world test; the article is completely theoretical otherwise, isn't it? editeur24 ( talk) 15:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
I added an endnote and two references to this template. I tried to determine how this works with templates, but I could not figure it out. If endnotes and reference lists cause problems in templates, please correct my error(s), and, if possible, retain the endnote and citations using an appropriate method for templates. Thanks! Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 13:39, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
An anonymous editor changed the result for the prevalence threshold calculation from 19.1% to 26.8% ( diff). I double-checked, calculating by hand, and I came up with a similar result, viz., 0.2686485335687089 ≈ 0.2686, but it seems the anonymous editor made a rounding error. If my maths are correct, it should be 26.9%. Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 18:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, should the 'population' not be 'number of tested people' at the calculation of accuracy ?-- Rcsmit ( talk) 18:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
EDIT: Never mind, in this case they are the same -- Rcsmit ( talk) 18:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() | Statistics Template‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Medicine Template‑class | ||||||
|
The endoscopy example appears to be a real-world one. Please link to a source for it. If it is not real, it would be very useful to find a real-world example to use. I'd like to know the numerical levels for at least one real-world test; the article is completely theoretical otherwise, isn't it? editeur24 ( talk) 15:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
I added an endnote and two references to this template. I tried to determine how this works with templates, but I could not figure it out. If endnotes and reference lists cause problems in templates, please correct my error(s), and, if possible, retain the endnote and citations using an appropriate method for templates. Thanks! Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 13:39, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
An anonymous editor changed the result for the prevalence threshold calculation from 19.1% to 26.8% ( diff). I double-checked, calculating by hand, and I came up with a similar result, viz., 0.2686485335687089 ≈ 0.2686, but it seems the anonymous editor made a rounding error. If my maths are correct, it should be 26.9%. Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) [he/his/him] 18:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, should the 'population' not be 'number of tested people' at the calculation of accuracy ?-- Rcsmit ( talk) 18:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
EDIT: Never mind, in this case they are the same -- Rcsmit ( talk) 18:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)