Papers › Aggregating multiple test results to improve medical decision-making

Aggregating multiple test results to improve medical decision-making

24 Sep 2024arXiv:2409.16442links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Lucas Böttcher, Maria R. D'Orsogna, Tom Chou

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Gathering observational data for medical decision-making often involves uncertainties arising from both type I (false positive)and type II (false negative) errors. In this work, we develop a statistical model to study how medical decision-making can be improved by repeating diagnostic and screening tests, and aggregating their results. This approach is relevant not only in clinical settings, such as medical imaging, but also in public health, as highlighted by the need for rapid, cost-effective testing methods during the SARS-CoV-2pandemic. Our model enables the development of testing protocols with an arbitrary number of tests, which can be customized to meet requirements for type I and type II errors. This allows us to adjust sensitivity and specificity according to application-specific needs. Additionally, we derive generalized Rogan--Gladen estimates for estimating disease prevalence, accounting for an arbitrary number of tests with potentially different type I and type II errors. We also provide the corresponding uncertainty quantification.

PaperPDFCode

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections