| |||||||||||||
why software is differentwhy software is differentPosted Nov 27, 2012 15:11 UTC (Tue) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)In reply to: why software is different by hummassa Parent article: Phipps: Stop patent mischief by curbing patent enforcement
It means that it's useless for 89.1% of the patients. The target of the drug better have a high fatality rate (to justify the 1% "bad stuff" rate) and low false positive (to justify the 9.9% efficacy plus the cost) to justify its use. Numbers should always be taken in context :) .
(Log in to post comments)
why software is different Posted Dec 12, 2012 10:50 UTC (Wed) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]
A useless drug (as opposed to a killing drug) is a good drug.
if you have 1000 patients, half of them sick and the other half misdiagnosed:
* with the "useless" drug: 10 of them will die (because of the side effects of the drug, will kill 1% of the patients).
* without the "useless" drug: 50 of them will die (because the drug would have saved 10% of the really sick patients).
why software is different Posted Dec 12, 2012 10:58 UTC (Wed) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]
I should go without saying that I mean "N people will die" DURING the treatment. All of them will die, of course.
why software is different Posted Dec 12, 2012 10:59 UTC (Wed) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]
Again: IT should go without saying...
why software is different Posted Dec 12, 2012 11:59 UTC (Wed) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link] We haven't in this example been told what the disease's fatality rate under the current standard-of-care treatment is, or even if there is a current standard-of-care treatment other than "nutrients, fluids, painkillers, and rest".
|
|||||||||||||