Talk:Gold standard (test)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] somewhat pedantically
I think there is a POV in saying that the "AMA somewhat pedantically prefers the phrase" --Lux 04:41, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Contradiction
The start of the article says that a gold standard test is 100% accurate. The last paragraph tells of imperfect yet allegedly gold standard tests. Where does the truth lie? 69.157.111.210 23:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
To me it seems there is no contradiction. The second paragraph tells of what a gold standard should aspire to be, and states that in clinical medicine there are no such ideal gold standards; the imperfect (but still very good) tests are referred to as gold standards. --81.132.1.136 20:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)DB
[edit] Gold Standard in Machine Learning
The notion of a gold standard is also used in the area of machine learning and especially applications in computational linguistics. However it does refer to a quite similar concept there, so it might not be a good idea to create a new article. In machine learning classification problems (seperate a set of data in classes in an automatic manner) the term "gold standard" refers to a manually classified set of data which is then used to validate the performance of classification algorithms. Any ideas how to bring this in?
[edit] Gold standard in medical research
Edited the first paragraph to include the gold standard for medical research (e.g., survival to hospital discharge for resuscitation research, decrease in 30 day mortality for other types of medical research). Accidentally clicked 'minor' edit. MoodyGroove 21:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)MoodyGroove
