Linked Life Data

1320500

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/1320500

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:dateCreated
1992-8-12
pubmed:abstractText
True and false positive rates of auditory and visual evoked potentials, as well as multi-modal evoked potentials, were assessed in groups of 30 multiple sclerosis patients and 19 healthy age-matched subjects. Sensitivity (true positive rate) generally proved to be high confirming published reports. False positive rates, which have not been extensively reported previously, proved to be unacceptably high. This held for two different abnormality thresholds (2 or 3 SD above the mean). The explanation for this proved to lie in the nature of an evoked potential test, which may be regarded as a combination of multiple independent components. The combination method, used to label the evoked potential test as normal or abnormal, governs the false positive rate. When the abnormality of at least one component is sufficient to label an evoked potential as abnormal, then the high false positive rate soars with the number of components. To increase the value of clinical evoked potential studies, it is advised that attention is paid to combination methodology, and that true as well as false positive rates should be directly measured.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:issn
0303-8467
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
94 Suppl
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
S161-4
pubmed:dateRevised
2009-10-14
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1992
pubmed:articleTitle
Pitfalls, fallacies and false positive rates.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Neurology and Clinical Neurophysiology, University Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article