‘Over-diagnosis’ is observed when the prevalence of diagnoses made in clinical services, referred to as administrative prevalence (based on healthcare databases or insurance claims) exceeds prevalence estimates based on accurate assessments in representative population-based samples. Over-diagnosis may occur when diagnostic criteria are not applied with sufficient rigour, leading to false-positive cases. Over-diagnosis may also happen when people inappropriately self-diagnose. Notably, for individuals with milder or subclinical symptoms, a diagnosis can sometimes do more harm than good, creating stigma or leading to low-benefit treatments with significant side-effects.
So is Admin Prevalence > Prevalence Estimates where the estimates are made based on representative population-based samples?
Holy shit... I had no clue that wincompose exists. For years, I've wanted exactly this. I'm so glad that someone had the same idea, skill, and time to create this. Thank you for sharing!
Agreed. I think a lot of the people talking about how they are self taught are working in tech and software and they were hire twenty years ago or more. (Can't wait till someone sounds off about how they got hired nine years ago).
Most other technical jobs are in far more mature fields. College may expose you to ideal situations that overconstrain your ability to get the job done in a corporate setting, but it still exposed you to a set of problems you don't have access to otherwise. Mainly because these industries are in communication with the deans of these colleges and giving them feedback on what they need to see more of.
It is way too common to confuse the abstractions we use to understand reality with reality itself. Like the scientists who work with this stuff are really consistent in keeping the two separated
I wish this was true. I remember seeing a physicist talking about how the laws of physics are mathematical in nature and that the laws of physics needed to exist before the universe do the universe is made of math. I don't think the vast majority of physicists have a philosophical grounding for the types of ontological claims they make. Even less so since "shut up and calculate" became the professional axiom.
Having problems on the y-axis.... I get that the spiral doesn't work otherwise, but damn. Surprisingly tough for me.