|
|
|
|
|
|
by alexandercrohde
2969 days ago
|
|
|
What? 95% accuracy is outstanding. I see that you're saying if you said "No" for all babies, that'd be 95%, so that's a legitimate point. However, it sounds like it's better than that "We were also able to predict ASD severity, as indicated by the ADOS Calibrated Severity Score, with quite high reliability, also by 9 months of age." I imagine the intervention is ABA therapy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_behavior_analysis#Effi...) or similar, which is costly, but otherwise not a risk. |
|
|
95% specificity and 95% sensitivity isn't good enough to test the general population. See why here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16981888