Earlier quoted context omitted.
According to Wikipedia, accuracy is actually defined in this context. This does not not mean that Bosch has not used everyday speech here but it is not clear that they have. Too bad that the article does not include links to additional information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_and_specificity#De...
Of course accuracy is defined, but it's not the right metric because you usually have a large bias in the tested population: even if you only test people with symptoms, you might only have 10% of people that actually have the disease; so a test that always says "NO" would have 90% accuracy. That's why you look at True Positive Rate (sensitivity) and True Negative Rate (specificity) to factor that bias out. If TPR is…
Would it though? It's my understanding that most people who test positive are still being sent home, not forcefully hospitalized. And given that we don't actually have a widely used pharmaceutical intervention protocol, there's no side effects to worry about from false positives (eg of the opposite of this: if we were giving every confirmed case chloroquine or interleukin). The worst case outcome from a high false positive rate (low TNR) would seem to me that people would be extra good at self quarantining.