Comparative accuracy: Assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways

British Medical Journal

Volumn 332, Issue 7549, 2006, Pages 1089-1092

  Bossuyt, Patrick M ^a   Irwig, Les ^b   Craig, Jonathan ^b,c   Glasziou, Paul ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c CHILDREN S HOSPITAL AT WESTMEAD   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME; ANKLE FRACTURE; BRAIN HEMORRHAGE; BREAST CANCER; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COLORECTAL CANCER; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DEPRESSION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DOWN SYNDROME; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; HEART FAILURE; HUMAN; IRON DEFICIENCY ANEMIA; LUNG EMBOLISM; LUNG SMALL CELL CANCER; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MICROMETASTASIS; NOTE; PARKINSON DISEASE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; QUALITY CONTROL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; STANDARD; TUBERCULOSIS; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; METHODOLOGY; REVIEW;

DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRIAGE;

EID: 33646483378     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.332.7549.1089     Document Type: Note

References (16)

1. Knottnerus JA, van Weel C, Muris JW. Evaluation of diagnostic procedures. BMJ 2002;324:477-80.
2. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Group. Standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:40-4.
3. Irwig L, Bossuyt P, Glasziou P, Gatsonis C, Lijmer J. Designing studies to ensure that estimates of test accuracy are transferable. BMJ 2002;324:669-71.
4. Wright TC Jr, Denny L, Kuhn L, Pollack A, Lorincz A. HPV DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples compared with cytologic screening to detect cervical cancer. JAMA 2000;283:81-6.
5. Alonzo TA, Pepe MS, Moskowitz CS. Sample size calculations for comparative studies of medical tests for detecting presence of disease. Stat Med 2002;21:835-52.
6. Pepe MS. The statistical evaluation of medical tests for classification and prediction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
7. Chock C, Irwig L, Berry G, Glasziou P. Comparing dichotomous screening tests when individuals negative on both tests are not verified. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:1211-7.
8. Bachmann LM, Kolb E, Koller MT, Steurer J, ter Riet G. Accuracy of Ottawa ankle rules to exclude fractures of the ankle and mid-foot: systematic review. BMJ 2003;326:417-20.
9. Van Belle A, Buller HR, Huisman MV, Huisman PM, Kaasjager K, Kamphuisen PW, for the Christopher Study. Effectiveness of managing suspected pulmonary embolism using an algorithm combining clinical probability, D-dimer testing, and computed tomography. JAMA 2006;295:172-9.
10. Macaskill P, Walter SD, Irwig L, Franco EL. Assessing the gain in diagnostic performance when combining two diagnostic tests. Stat Med 2002;21:2527-46.
11. Arroll B, Goodyear-Smith F, Kerse N, Fishman T, Gunn J. Effect of the addition of a "help" question to two screening questions on specificity for diagnosis of depression in general practice: diagnostic validity study. BMJ 2005;331:884.
12. Guyatt GH, Tugwell PX, Feeny DH, Haynes RB, Drummond M. A framework for clinical evaluation of diagnostic technologies. CMAJ 1986;134:587-94.
13. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991;11:88-94.
14. Bruns DE. Laboratory-related outcomes in healthcare. Clin Chem 2001;47:1547-52.
15. Bossuyt PM, Lijmer JG, Mol BWJ. Randomised comparisons of medical tests: sometimes valid, not always efficient. Lancet 2000;356:1844-7.
16. Moons KG, Biesheuvel CJ, Grobbee DE. Test research versus diagnostic research. Clin Chem 2004;50:473-6.