quick ?

Vic Nicholls nichollsvi2 at GMAIL.COM
Wed Apr 23 17:45:29 UTC 2014


Hmmm if you're talking about the flu, colds, etc. 40% is too much. 
Otherwise in my case 25% to 30% would be correct.

My former PCP had a rate of about 100%. Simple: he knew my "reference 
ranges" were smaller and tighter, and took changes in them to figure it 
out. I learned to do the same thing and my hit rate was excellent. When 
you tried to tell other docs how to do that, I would get told it makes 
things harder that way. Well if all you are reading is a lab chart and 
making a decision I guess so.

It requires a bit of brain cell thought but looking at a pattern and 
going aha doesn't seem to take me but about 15 min or less.

On 4/23/2014 12:01 PM, Pauker, Stephen wrote:
>
> What # is quoted for freq of diag errors in routine practice
>
> without reference to selection bias??
>
> I think I heard a news story quoting something like 40% of encounters 
> or patients.
>
> Hard to believe that # which seems grossly inflated
>
> Steve
>
>








To unsubscribe from the IMPROVEDX list, click the following link:<br>
<a href="http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1" target="_blank">http://list.improvediagnosis.org/scripts/wa-IMPDIAG.exe?SUBED1=IMPROVEDX&A=1</a>
</p>

HTML Version:
URL: <../attachments/20140423/884d2f5c/attachment.html>


More information about the Test mailing list