Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways


Development and introduction of new diagnostic techniques have greatly accelerated over the past decades. The evaluation of diagnostic techniques, however, is less advanced than that of treatments. Unlike with drugs, there are generally no formal requirements for adoption of diagnostic tests in routine care. In spite of important contributions, 1 2 the methodology of diagnostic research is poorly defined compared with study designs on treatment effectiveness, or on aetiology, so it is not surprising that methodological flaws are common in diagnostic studies.3-5 Furthermore, research funds rarely cover diagnostic research starting from symptoms or tests.

Since quality of the diagnostic process largely determines quality of care, overcoming deficiencies in standards, methodology, and funding deserves high priority. This article summarises objectives of diagnostic testing and research, methodological challenges, and options for design of studies.

Texto Completo: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/324/7335/477.pdf

1. Feinstein AR. Clinical epidemiology. The architecture of clinical research. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1985.
2. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology: a basic science for clinical medicine. Boston: Little, Brown, 1985.
3. Sheps SB, Schechter MT. The assessment of diagnostic tests. A survey of current medical research. JAMA 1984; 252: 2418-2422[Abstract].
4. Reid ML, Lachs MS, Feinstein AR. Use of methodological standards in diagnostic research. Getting better but still not good. JAMA 1995; 274: 645-651[Abstract].
5. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, Bonsel GJ, Prins MH, van der Meulen JH, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 1999; 282: 1061-1066[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Panzer RJ, Black ER, Griner PF, eds. Diagnostic strategies for common medical problems. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians, 1991.
7. Stoffers HEJH, Kester ADM, Kaiser V, Rinkens PELM, Knottnerus JA. Diagnostic value of signs and symptoms associated with peripheral arterial obstructive disease seen in general practice: a multivariable approach. Med Decis Making 1997; 17: 61-70[Abstract/Free Full Text].
8. Fijten GHF. Rectal bleeding, a danger signal? Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers, 1993.
9. Knottnerus JA, Dinant GJ. Medicine based evidence, a prerequisite for evidence based medicine. BMJ 1997; 315: 1109-1110[Free Full Text].
10. Ransohoff DF, Feinstein AR. Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. N Engl J Med 1978; 299: 926-930[Abstract].
11. Begg CB. Biases in the assessment of diagnostic tests. Med Stat 1987; 6: 411-423.
12. Knottnerus JA, Leffers P. The influence of referral patterns on the characteristics of diagnostic tests. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 1143-1154[CrossRef][ISI][Medline].
13. Feinstein AR. Clinimetrics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.
14. Schwartz WB, Wolfe HJ, Pauker SG. Pathology and probabilities, a new approach to interpreting and reporting biopsies. N Engl J Med 1981; 305: 917-923[Abstract].
15. Van Weel C, Knottnerus JA. Evidence-based interventions and comprehensive treatment. Lancet 1999; 353: 916-918[CrossRef][ISI][Medline].
16. Spiegelhalter DJ, Crean GP, Holden R, Knill-Jones RP. Taking a calculated risk: predictive scoring systems in dyspepsia. Scand J Gastroenterol 1987; 22(suppl 128): S152-S160.
17. Knottnerus JA. Application of logistic regression to the analysis of diagnostic data. Med Decis Making 1992; 12: 93-108.
18. Moons KG, Stijnen T, Michel BC, Buller HR, Van Es GA, Grobbee DE, et al. Application of treatment thresholds to diagnostic-test evaluation: an alternative to the comparison of areas un received operating characteristic curves. Med Decis Making 1997; 17: 447-454[Abstract/Free Full Text].
19. Liechtenstein JI, Feinstein AR, Suzio KD, DeLuca V, Spiro HM. The effectiveness of panendoscopy on diagnostic and therapeutic decisions about chronic abdominal pain. J Clin Gastroenterol 1980; 2: 31-36[ISI][Medline].
20. Sackett DL, Haynes RB. The architecture of clinical diagnosis. In press.
21. Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax Ph, Roeser R. Ten to fourteen year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1982; 69: 349-355.
22. Harms LM, Schellevis FG, van Eijk JT, Donker AJ, Bouter LM. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among hypertensive patients in general practice: the evaluation of long-term systematic management. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 779-786[CrossRef][ISI][Medline].
23. Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R, Mravunac M, Sturmans F, Day NE. Reduction of breast cancer mortality through mass-screening with modern mammography. Lancet 1984; i: 1222-1224.
24. Guyatt GH, Tugwell P, Feeny DH, Drummond MF, Haynes RB. The role of before-after studies of therapeutic impact in the evaluation of diagnostic technologies. J Chron Dis 1986; 39: 295-304[CrossRef][ISI][Medline].
25. Irwig L, Macaskill P, Glasziou P, Fahey M. Meta-analytic methods for diagnostic test accuracy. J Clin Epidemiol 1995; 48: 119-130[CrossRef][ISI][Medline].
26. Buntinx F, Brouwers M. Relation between sampling device and detection of abnormality in cervical smears: meta-analysis of randomised and quasi-randomised studies. BMJ 1996; 313: 1285-1290[Abstract/Free Full Text].
27. Benavente O, Moher D, Pham B. Carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis. BMJ 1998; 317: 1477-1480[Abstract/Free Full Text].
28. Van Wijk MA, van der Lei J, Mosseveld M, Bohnen AM, van Bemmel JH. Assessment of decision support for blood test ordering in primary care. A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2001; 74: 274-281.
29. Elstein AS. Heuristics and biases: selected errors in clinical reasoning. Acad Med 1999; 74: 791-794[ISI][Medline].

© BMJ 2002

Related Articles

Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways
Patrick M Bossuyt, Les Irwig, Jonathan Craig, and Paul Glasziou
BMJ 2006 332: 1089-1092. [Full Text]

Psychic wages
BMJ 2002 324: 0.

[Full Text]
This entry was posted in Diagnostico and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s