So here's your typical table for evaluating the performance of a diagnostic test:
Gold standard result +------------------------------------+ | Positive | Negative | +-----------+==================+=================+ | Positive | (A) | (B) | Test |-----------+------------------+-----------------+ result | Negative | (C) | (D) | +-----------+==================+=================+
Where:
(A) True positive
(B) False positive
(C) False negative
(D) True negative
And where: $$ \text{Positive Predictive Value (PPV)} = \frac{(A)}{(A)+(B)} $$
I'm wondering if I can determine the PPV of a physician's ordering of a test, not the PPV of the test itself.
Consider the following table, which mirrors the first table but is an attempt to measure the PPV of ordering a test. The following table functions under the assumption that "true infection status" is determined by a test with perfect sensitivity and specificity:
True infection status +------------------------------------+ | Infected | Uninfected | +-----------+==================+=================+ | Yes | (A) | (B) | Test |-----------+------------------+-----------------+ ordered | No | (C) | (D) | +-----------+==================+=================+
Where:
(A) Tested Appropriately
(B) Tested Inappropriately
(C) Untested Inappropriately
(D) Untested Appropriately
I have the data for (A) and (B), but not (C) and (D). Would I be breaking any rules by determining the PPV of test ordering? Or, is there a better measurement for this?
Thanks!