Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We know laboratory B is in the Coombe and we know the two US labs are laboratories A and C. I took the figure of abnormalities detected directly to an expert because it was on the front page of one of our national newspapers cited as evidence that the US laboratories were not as good. The expert said that was nonsense. He said laboratory B, which is in the Coombe, is showing a higher percentage of abnormalities detected because the Coombe is sent higher-risk tests. The expert said of course the Coombe would show a higher percentage. Furthermore, he said that the percentage of abnormalities detected is not what experts use to determine the accuracy of the laboratory. They use positive predictive value because a false negative is so hard to get since it relies on self-reporting and because moving from pre-cancerous to cancerous cells can take ten, 12 or 15 years. He said, therefore, that the industry standard is positive predictive value, PPV. Moreover, he said that when we look at positive predictive value in two of the three years examined the Irish laboratory is the least accurate. Do the academy representatives believe that using the percentage of anomalies detected is a legitimate measure? I am being told by the experts is that it is not and that it is potentially a determinant of socio-demographics, that is to say, different test results for different population groups. I am also being told that the Coombe may be getting what are already identified as high-risk samples.