Letter

Why clinicians are natural bayesians: Clinicians have to be bayesians

BMJ 2005; 330 doi: 10.1136/bmj.330.7504.1390-c (Published 9 June 2005)
Cite this as: BMJ 2005;330:1390.4

This article has a correction

Please see: Why clinicians are natural bayesians: Authors' reply

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

  1. Robert McCrossin, consultant paediatrician (Robert_McCrossin@health.qld.gov.au)
  1. Department of Paediatrics, Hervey Bay Hospital, QLD 4655, Australia

    EDITOR—Clinicians are natural bayesians when it comes to diagnosis.1 They have to be. The alternative approach might be to use the methods of classical hypothesis testing, but probably only once.

    The Neyman-Pearson diagnosis of coeliac disease

    (Assume that the sensitivity and specificity of transglutaminase IgA are both 95%.)

    Parent: Well doctor, have you got the result of the test yet?

    Doctor: Yes I have. …

    Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment

    Subscribe

    Article access

    Article access for 1 day

    Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*

    The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record

    * Prices do not include VAT

    Rapid responses

    THIS WEEK'S POLL

    BMJ most popular