Reporting results from studies evaluating diagnostic tests

Clinical Microbiology Newsletter

Volumn 24, Issue 8, 2002, Pages 60-63

  Meier, Kristen L ^a  

^a CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALCULATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; REVIEW; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 0037090942     PISSN: 01964399     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0196-4399(02)80013-7     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. "Sensitivity" and "specificity" reconsidered: The meaning of these terms in analytical and diagnostic settings
2. Biases in the assessment of diagnostic tests
3. Misclassification in 22 tables
4. Comparison of a screening test and a reference test in epidemiologic studies. II. A probabilistic model for the comparison of diagnostic tests
5. Discrepant analysis: A biased and an unscientific method for estimating test sensitivity and specificity
6. Dealing with discrepancy analysis. Part 1. The problem of bias
7. Dealing with discrepancy analysis. Part 2. Alternative analytical strategies
8. Quantifying the bias associated with use of discrepant analysis
9. Discrepant analysis: How can we test a test?
10. Bias in discrepant analysis: When two wrongs don't make a right
11. Methodology for the assessment of new dichotomous diagnostic tests
12. Evaluating diagnostic tests with imperfect standards
13. Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: A review
14. Using a combination of reference tests to assess the accuracy of a new diagnostic test
15. Some issues in resolution of diagnostic tests using an imperfect gold standard
16. Evaluation of diagnostic tests without gold standards
17. A model for evaluating sensitivity and specificity for correlated diagnostic tests in efficacy studies with an imperfect reference test
18. Evaluating diagnostic tests