[burger]

It means that if the specificity were 98.5%, you would generate enough false positives to account for all the positive tests they saw.

BC

You don't need 98.5% specificity.  Even with 99.5% specificity, the confidence interval on that estimate easily accounts for all of the positives in the real test.

Bottom line: everyone should ignore this study.  I'm embarrassed that Stanford is associated with this.

[burger]

It means that if the specificity were 98.5%, you would generate enough false positives to account for all the positive tests they saw.

BC

You don't need 98.5% specificity.  Even with 99.5% specificity, the confidence interval on that estimate easily accounts for all of the positives in the real test.

Bottom line: everyone should ignore this study.  I'm embarrassed that Stanford is associated with this.