The phrase "a true prevalence" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when discussing the actual occurrence or frequency of something, often in a statistical or research context.
Example: "The study aimed to determine a true prevalence of the disease in the population, rather than relying on estimates."
Alternatives: "an accurate prevalence" or "a genuine prevalence".
Using the model, we demonstrate that the negative results obtained for all samples using IHC and histopathology are consistent with a true prevalence of infection in the slaughter population of up to 11%.
The results of the model demonstrate that to estimate a true prevalence of scrapie infection of 1% with an accuracy of ±0.5% would have required a far larger sample size.
If rates would reflect a true prevalence, it could be possible that Europe has lagged behind the US in a secular trend.
We selected the target level of accuracy so that, given a true prevalence of 15%, we could exclude a prevalence of 10% or lower.
The purpose of this paper is to present a methodological framework for estimating a "true prevalence" and evaluating optimally, in a single analysis different malaria diagnostic tests.
The DECODE Study Group has reported that, compared to fasting glucose, the use of this gold standard would yield a true prevalence 30 to 60% higher [19], [20], [21].
These could have given us a truer prevalence rate.
As a mean true prevalence of 0.10 divided the geographic area into two sections fairly uniform according to the numbers of geographic areas, the material was stratified according to this mean true prevalence: One group of areas (n = 11) with a mean true prevalence lower than 0.10 (range: 0.01 to 0.03) and one group of areas (n = 8) with a mean true prevalence higher than 0.10 (range: 0.11 to 0.41).
To some extent, a low true prevalence of L. intracellularis seropositivity reflects the presence of long-term treatment with antibiotics [ 9].
In the absence of a gold standard true prevalence was obtained, using a Bayesian approach, with a model that uses both available data and prior information.
This probably represents an underestimate of the true prevalence; a more accurate estimate would require a dedicated study, with strict diagnostic criteria focused on this specific question.
