Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 12, 2026

Identification of Disease-related Spatial Covariance Patterns using Neuroimaging Data
Published on: June 26, 2013
A perspective on standardizing the predictive power of noninvasive cardiovascular tests by likelihood ratio
1Division of Cardiovascular Diseases and Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minn 55905, USA.
Insights
This study introduces likelihood ratios as a superior method for evaluating noninvasive cardiovascular test performance. Likelihood ratios offer unambiguous measures of a test's rule-in and rule-out power, independent of disease prevalence.
Area of Science:
- Medical Diagnostics
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Biostatistics
Background:
- Current reporting of positive and negative predictive value (PV), sensitivity (Se), and specificity (Sp) for noninvasive cardiovascular tests has limitations.
- Predictive values are highly dependent on pretest disease prevalence.
- Sensitivity and specificity alone do not provide clear quantitation of a test's rule-in or rule-out capabilities.
Purpose of the Study:
- To present a rationale for using positive and negative likelihood ratios ((+)LR and (-)LR) as an alternative standard for expressing predictive power.
- To demonstrate that likelihood ratios provide unambiguous measures of test performance.
- To show that likelihood ratios are independent of disease prevalence.
Main Methods:
- Likelihood ratios are calculated using sensitivity and specificity: (+)LR = Se/(1 - Sp) and (-)LR = Sp/(1 - Se).
- Analysis of predictive value equations to show likelihood ratios as quotients of posttest predictive value odds to pretest prevalence odds.
- Comparison of likelihood ratios among different tests in a common population to assess relative predictive power.
Main Results:
- Likelihood ratios incorporate Se and Sp, yielding single, unambiguous measures of positive and negative predictive power.
- Likelihood ratios represent the odds advantage in posttest probability of disease or no disease, independent of pretest prevalence.
- Quotients of (+)LR or (-)LR among tests in a common population directly express their relative predictive power.
Conclusions:
- Likelihood ratios offer a more robust and prevalence-independent method for evaluating the predictive power of diagnostic tests.
- The likelihood ratio principle is applicable for comparing multiple tests and evaluating performance across different thresholds.
- Adoption of likelihood ratios can improve the clarity and utility of reporting diagnostic test performance in cardiovascular medicine.
Abstract:
The current practice of reporting positive and negative predictive value (PV), sensitivity (Se), and specificity (Sp) as measures of the power of noninvasive cardiovascular tests has significant limitations. A test result's PV and its comparison with other test results are highly dependent on the pretest disease prevalence at which it is determined; the citation of sensitivity and specificity provides no succinct or explicit quantitation of the rule-in and rule-out power of a test. This article presents a rationale for the use of an alternative standard for expressing predictive power in the form of positive and negative likelihood ratios, (+)LR and (-)LR. The likelihood ratios are composite expressions of test power, which incorporate the Se and Sp and their respective complements [(1 - Se) and (1 - Sp)], thus yielding single unambiguous measures of positive and negative predictive power. The likelihood ratios are calculated as follows: (+)LR = Se/(1 - Sp) and (-)LR = Sp/(1 - Se). On analysis of the predictive value equations, the likelihood ratios equal the quotients of the posttest predictive value odds to the pretest prevalence odds for disease and no disease, respectively, as follows: (+)LR = (+)PVOd/POD and (-)LR = (-)PVOn/PON, where (+)PVOd is positive predictive value odds for disease, POD is prevalence odds for disease, (-)PVOn is negative predictive value odds for no disease, and PON is prevalence odds for no disease. Thus, the likelihood ratios are measures of the odds advantage in posttest probability of disease or no disease relative to pretest probability, independent of disease prevalence in the tested population. The quotients of the (+)LR or the (-)LR among test results studied in a common population are direct expressions of their relative predictive power in that population. The likelihood ratio principle is applicable to the evaluation of the predictive power of multiple tests performed in a common population and to estimating predictive power at multiple test thresholds.
Related Concept Videos
Testing a Claim about Population Proportion
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
Sensitivity is the...
Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot
Relative Risk
Odds Ratio

