“…, administered in 1000 individuals, would average 36% if disease prevalence is 5%,[44/(44 þ 124)], in, say, a younger, non-smoking hypertensive woman with atypical chest pain, rising to 87%, [440/(440 þ 65)], that is close to certainty, for disease prevalence of 50% as in a middleaged hypertensive, dyslipidaemic male smoker with typical chest pain, showing quite clearly the essential contribution of clinical judgement to diagnostic work-up.In contrast to PPV, negative predictive value (NPV) (the ratio of true-negative results to both true-negative and false-negative results), that is the probability that a person with a negative (N) test does not have aThe diagnostic performance of non-invasive stress tests in hypertensive patients with chest painTable 2provides the diagnostic ORs and other indicators of diagnostic performance of non-invasive stress tests for the detection of coronary stenoses in hypertensive patients with chest pain. The table compiles a series of angiographically validated studies comparing electrocardiogram (EKG) exercise stress, stress echocardiography and SPECT[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] and does not refer to diagnostic techniques still sparsely validated in hypertensive patients, such as exercise echocardiography, nuclear computed tomography, MRI and PET reviewed in previous work, which the interested reader is referred to.…”