Talk:Thompson test

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chiropractic Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chiropractic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chiropractic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChiropracticWikipedia:WikiProject ChiropracticTemplate:WikiProject ChiropracticChiropractic articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Name change[edit]

I propose that a much more common name for this test is the "Thompson test" and that the article should be moved to reflect this. --ITasteLikePaint (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Simmond's triad includes Thompson test which is mentioned here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.110.2.18 (talk) 14:39, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wholly agree with the rename. Tinss (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Predictive Values[edit]

The article currently states that the test has a positive predictive value of 13.7 and a negative predictive value of 0.1. The calculation for positive predictive value is given as the ratio of true positives to true positives plus false positives, meaning that the value lies between 0 and 1. Thus, a predictive value of 13.7 makes no sense. If the statement is taken to mean 13.7%, then the follow up that the Simmonds' test is an accurate indicator of an achilles rupture would be wrong. I do not have access to the literature source used to make this claim, however the sources that I can find give substantially different values of 0.93 and 1 for positive and negative specificity respectively. If anyone can provide some clarification on this point, it would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:1203:C659:3501:F5AF:F98F:5664 (talk) 03:54, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This has long since been removed from the article, but those were almost certainly intended to be positive and negative likelihood ratios, not positive and negative predictive values. TompaDompa (talk) 02:53, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 October 2021[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) Iffy★Chat -- 22:27, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Simmonds' test → Thompson test – Cleanup of Template:Inappropriate title soft. This title was the one suggested above. PubMed search results seem to confirm that the suggested title is indeed the WP:COMMONNAME, with "Thompson test" yielding 55 results and "Simmonds' test" as well as "Simmonds test" yielding 0. TompaDompa (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support, that's the more common name in practice too. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 23:05, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.