- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hospitals confirm mistakes in Florida’s COVID-19 report
Posted on 7/14/20 at 1:31 pm to GRTiger
Posted on 7/14/20 at 1:31 pm to GRTiger
quote:
What's a high positive rate? 59 sites between 100-1000 tests had a rate over 30%. That's potentially thousands of falsely reported positives.
That's a hard question to answer, because the answer would be multifaceted.
I would definitely question any lab reporting 75% or above positive results. But, a hospital/medical center's in-house lab would probably show high positive numbers since staff would need results in a timely manner for a recent admit exhibiting severe symptoms in order to make treatment decisions. Thereby testing more probable cases only, which would return higher positivity rates.
For stand alone labs over 30% surely raises eyebrows, but that does not in and of itself suggest any shenanigans. States have prioritized immediate reporting of positive cases. Have the negative results been fully reported by the lab in question? Is the lab in question being used a defacto in-house lab for a hospital/medical center? The FL DOH daily report states that this is what has been electonically reported to them by the labs as of a certain point in time. As to a 50% to 100% positive rate - "Lucy you have some splaining to do".
If you noticed on Louisiana data dump days (due to backlogs) the percent positive is low because a lot, but not all, of the backlogged tests are negative results.
This post was edited on 7/14/20 at 1:34 pm
0
Posted on 7/14/20 at 1:31 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
You are still assuming that they didn't report negatives (or total tests) and not just screwed up the reporting of % positive.
It doesn't appear to be that they simply didn't report negatives, at least in some cases where negatives are reported, just as an unusually small percent of total. In one of the examples quoted in the OP, Orlando Health, the report indicates:
Total tests - 522
Positives - 512
Negatives - 10
Rate - 98% positive
We know there's was actually 9.4% positive, or
Positives - 49
Negatives - 473
So just in that one example, we know there are 463 erroneous positives in the report.
If you set a baseline of say 12% actual positive rate, you can pick out a few that would add up to a lot of erroneous positives.
To assume that they simply didn't report negatives (meaning the real number of positives in the report is correct, only the ratio is off), you'd have to come up with a good reason why they did report some of them.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 1:37 pm to El Magnifico
So people are going to end up losing their business, kids are going to end up losing a lot of what should be the best time of their lives, people have lost jobs, I'm sure there have probably been a few suicides behind the depression, marriages that were on the rocks probably finally got done in behind this, etc. etc. etc.
And meanwhile, some people are like, "my bad". Oops. We miscalculated. We overstated. Math error.
Unfricking believable.
And meanwhile, some people are like, "my bad". Oops. We miscalculated. We overstated. Math error.
Unfricking believable.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 1:43 pm to GRTiger
quote:
It doesn't appear to be that they simply didn't report negatives, at least in some cases where negatives are reported, just as an unusually small percent of total. In one of the examples quoted in the OP, Orlando Health, the report indicates:
Total tests - 522
Positives - 512
Negatives - 10
Rate - 98% positive
We know there's was actually 9.4% positive, or
Positives - 49
Negatives - 473
So just in that one example, we know there are 463 erroneous positives in the report.
If you set a baseline of say 12% actual positive rate, you can pick out a few that would add up to a lot of erroneous positives.
To assume that they simply didn't report negatives (meaning the real number of positives in the report is correct, only the ratio is off), you'd have to come up with a good reason why they did report some of them.
Not saying you are incorrect in this assumption, but we do not know this to be correct because the article did not give raw testing numbers for the Orlando Medical hospital's in-house lab tests performed just their stated positive percentage. Had the raw numbers been provided we would know for sure one way or the other.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 1:59 pm to Curtis Lowe
addendum to previous post.
Orlando Health is one of the major medical centers in Orlando and sees many patients coming through their emergency room. Does it make sense that over 5 month period of seeing severe symptoms in patients that they would have only performed on average 110 in-house tests per month, 3 to 4 per day on average? And have been wrong or erroneously reported on 90% of same?
Just does not seem to add up.
Orlando Health is one of the major medical centers in Orlando and sees many patients coming through their emergency room. Does it make sense that over 5 month period of seeing severe symptoms in patients that they would have only performed on average 110 in-house tests per month, 3 to 4 per day on average? And have been wrong or erroneously reported on 90% of same?
Just does not seem to add up.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:10 pm to Curtis Lowe
quote:
Its not like someone is paying money per positive case.
You're quite wrong, fool:
Hospitals get paid more if patients listed as Coronavirus
Even the liberal rag Snopes couldn't dispute this it was so easily found.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:23 pm to AmosMosesAndTwins
quote:
reporting isn’t 100% accurate
Come on moron. I, as a complete layman called absolute bullshite when those numbers were reported. And nobody within the Florida Health, political, national political or national media bothered to question them?
I'm sure a few did, but those in charge took the numbers and ran with them because they fit their narrative. It's fricking stupid and you making light of it is stupid too.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:28 pm to GRTiger
quote:
Total tests - 522
Positives - 512
Negatives - 10
Rate - 98% positive
We know there's was actually 9.4% positive, or
Positives - 49
Negatives - 473
So just in that one example, we know there are 463 erroneous positives in the report.
Again, you are making this assumption without knowing anything.
They might have never updated the % positive column and just left it as 100%. Or something as stupid as the formula wasn't working in that cell.
So many possibilities other than being malicious.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:30 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
You're quite wrong, fool:
Hospitals get paid more if patients listed as Coronavirus
Even the liberal rag Snopes couldn't dispute this it was so easily found.
A positive case reported by a lab does not necessarily equal an admission to a hospital. Some (around 7%) will be admitted to a hospital, but not all positive cases. You made a statement that cooking the books on reporting positive cases is incentivized and that statement is patently incorrect.
And you call me a fool.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:34 pm to Curtis Lowe
quote:
Not saying you are incorrect in this assumption, but we do not know this to be correct because the article did not give raw testing numbers for the Orlando Medical hospital's in-house lab tests performed just their stated positive percentage. Had the raw numbers been provided we would know for sure one way or the other.
I got those numbers form the report linked in this thread. You are saying that they randomly counted 10 negatives, but left off the rest? Any reasonable guess as to why that would be the case?
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:37 pm to Curtis Lowe
quote:
ddendum to previous post.
Orlando Health is one of the major medical centers in Orlando and sees many patients coming through their emergency room. Does it make sense that over 5 month period of seeing severe symptoms in patients that they would have only performed on average 110 in-house tests per month, 3 to 4 per day on average? And have been wrong or erroneously reported on 90% of same?
Just does not seem to add up.
That was simply one lab among many in Orlando. I don't find it unreasonable that one lab would have any number of tests. For example, in that same report, "ORLANDO REG MED CENTER CLINICAL LAB" is listed with 36,756 tests.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:44 pm to GRTiger
(no message)
This post was edited on 7/14/20 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 7/14/20 at 2:46 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
Come on moron.
Butthurt much?
Posted on 7/14/20 at 3:05 pm to GRTiger
quote:
That was simply one lab among many in Orlando. I don't find it unreasonable that one lab would have any number of tests. For example, in that same report, "ORLANDO REG MED CENTER CLINICAL LAB" is listed with 36,756 tests.
Just an interesting aside: In said report Orlando Reg Med Center Clinical Lab has a 9.8% positive rate on test processed.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 3:15 pm to Curtis Lowe
"Orlando Health" is a collection of hospitals, including Orlando Regional Medical Center.
There is another line for "Orlando Regional Medical Center" with 23 tests, so focusing on the name of the lab as listed in the report is not necessarily the right thing to do. Advent Health Lab is part of Orlando Health Centers, and it is listed with over 100,000 tests.
There is another line for "Orlando Regional Medical Center" with 23 tests, so focusing on the name of the lab as listed in the report is not necessarily the right thing to do. Advent Health Lab is part of Orlando Health Centers, and it is listed with over 100,000 tests.
This post was edited on 7/14/20 at 3:17 pm
Posted on 7/14/20 at 3:38 pm to GRTiger
quote:
Orlando Health" is a collection of hospitals, including Orlando Regional Medical Center.
There is another line for "Orlando Regional Medical Center" with 23 tests, so focusing on the name of the lab as listed in the report is not necessarily the right thing to do. Advent Health Lab is part of Orlando Health Centers, and it is listed with over 100,000 tests.
So system wide they are reporting under different names, but the Hospital confirmed a 9.4% positivity rate, is that 9.4% system wide or just for that Hospital and how do we differentiate the reporting lab in question? Dammit, this just raises more questions.
Is the reporting in question a mislabel one day reporting? Is it just a lab with limited capacity and has not performed many tests?
Posted on 7/14/20 at 4:34 pm to Curtis Lowe
quote:
A positive case reported by a lab does not necessarily equal an admission to a hospital.
who do you think is ordering many of the tests for the lab, dumbass?
Posted on 7/14/20 at 4:57 pm to AmosMosesAndTwins
quote:
Shocker, reporting isn’t 100% accurate during an unprecedented pandemic!
This isn’t like they missed one or two cases
Posted on 7/14/20 at 6:19 pm to PrivatePublic
quote:
who do you think is ordering many of the tests for the lab, dumbass?
Please explain the thought process going through your feeble brain of how cooking the books with more positive cases as you declared in your OP is incentivized.
1. Lab gets paid for their services whether test is negative or positive. They do not get paid more for reporting positive results.
2. A positive test is not a hospital admission as I pointed out to you in your failed second attempt. Now hospitals might have a financial incentive to admit covid positive patients, however to argue that is what you meant in a thread regarding the questioning of the legitimacy of the daily state reporting of positive case is ludicrous, off topic, and a conflation of two very different subjects. That is why on two separate occasions I have asked for you to expound on your thought processes.
3. The market demand for the antigen tests is presently being driven by the public, employers and municipalities in efforts to identify positive cases and limit public exposure to the pathogen. Early on in the process the market demand was more medically driven than at the present.
4. In response to your latest enlightened diatribe, the sheer stupidity of which is staggering, how are hospitals ordering tests an incentivization of over-reporting positive test results? People are getting tests because they are either sick, required by employers or curious to see if they have been exposed to and contracted the virus. A lab doing what is mandated by the state, whether they get the reporting correct or err in so reporting, has absolutely nothing to do with incentives.
5. Oifieldbiology had a very apt answer if you need assistance in formulating one of your own.
To summarize: You used a talking point totally out of context to the subject matter, came to the defense of same with an off topic talking point totally out of contest to the subject matter, and followed that up with an irrelevant inanity.
Strike One
Strike Two
Strike Three
Grab some pine, meat.
Posted on 7/14/20 at 6:22 pm to Curtis Lowe
quote:
Curtis Lowe
Pleasure to meet you, Mr. Lowe. I've always been a fan of your talents on the dobro.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News