Using patient management as a surrogate for patient health outcomes in diagnostic test evaluation

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 12, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Staub, Lukas P ^a   Lord, Sarah J ^a   Simes, R John ^a   Dyer, Suzanne ^a   Houssami, Nehmat ^b   Chen, Robert Y M ^c   Irwig, Les ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c ST VINCENT S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EPIDEMIOLOGY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84857024249     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-12     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. GRADE: grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. Schunemann AHJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Jaeschke R, Vist GE, et al. British Medical Journal 2008 336 1106 1110 10.1136/bmj.39500.677199.AE 18483053 (Pubitemid 351731739)
2. Randomised comparisons of medical tests: sometimes invalid, not always efficient. Bossuyt PM, Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Bossuyt PM, Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Lancet 2000 356 1844 1847 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)03246-3 11117930
3. Computerized Cranial Tomography-Effect on Diagnostic and Therapeutic Plans. Fineberg HV, Bauman R, Sosman M, JAMA 1977 238 224 227 10.1001/jama.1977.03280030032016 406427 (Pubitemid 8154087)
4. The Role of Before After Studies of Therapeutic Impact in the Evaluation of Diagnostic Technologies. Guyatt GH, Tugwell PX, Feeny DH, Drummond MF, Haynes RB, Journal of Chronic Diseases 1986 39 295 304 10.1016/0021-9681(86)90051-2 3958116 (Pubitemid 16017616)
5. The diagnostic before-after study to assess clinical impact. Knottnerus JA, Dinant GJ, van Schayck OP, The Evidence Base of Clinical Diagnosis London: BMJ Books, Knottnerus JA, Buntinx F, 2 2009 83 95
6. Quality assessment of diagnostic before-after studies: development of methodology in the context of a systematic review. Meads CA, Davenport CF, BMC Medical Research Methodology 2009 9 3 10.1186/1471-2288-9-3 19152699
7. The Impact of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) on Expected Management During Cancer Treatment. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Shields AF, Liu DW, Gareen IF, Hanna L, et al. Cancer 2009 115 410 418 10.1002/cncr.24000 19016303
8. Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. Lo SS, Mumby PB, Norton J, Rychlik K, Smerage J, Kash J, et al. J Clin Oncol 2010 28 1671 1676 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.2119 20065191
9. Linking the evidence: intermediate outcomes in medical test assessments. Staub LP, Dyer S, Lord SJ, Simes RJ, Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2012 28 52 58
10. The Efficacy of Diagnostic-Imaging. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR, Med Decis Mak 1991 11 88 94 10.1177/0272989X9101100203
11. Proposals for a Phased Evaluation of Medical Tests. Lijmer JG, Leeflang M, Bossuyt PM, Med Decis Making 2009
12. Diagnosis-Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. Bossuyt PM, Irwig L, Craig J, Glasziou P, British Med J 2006 332 1089 1092 10.1136/bmj.332.7549.1089 (Pubitemid 44365494)
13. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. Ann Intern Med 2003 138 40 44 12513043 (Pubitemid 36232093)
14. When is measuring sensitivity and specificity sufficient to evaluate a diagnostic test, and when do we need randomized trials? Lord SJ, Irwig L, Simes RJ, Ann Intern Med 2006 144 850 855 16754927 (Pubitemid 46780618)
15. An Evidence Based Approach to Individualizing Treatment. Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, British Med J 1995 311 1356 1359 10.1136/bmj.311.7016.1356
16. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: Systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, Lord SJ, Warren RM, Dixon JM, et al. J Clin Oncol 2008 26 3248 3258 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.2108 18474876
17. Is perioperative point-of-care prothrombin time testing accurate compared to the standard laboratory test? Urwyler N, Staub LP, Beran D, Deplazes M, Lord SJ, Alberio L, et al. Thromb Haemost 2009 102 779 786 19806266
18. Does point of care prothrombin time measurement reduce the transfusion of fresh frozen plasma in patients undergoing major surgery? The POC-OP randomized-controlled trial. Urwyler N, Trelle S, Theiler L, Juni P, Staub LP, Luyet C, et al. Trials 2009 10 107 10.1186/1745-6215-10-107 19930626
19. Review of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in breast cancer: should MRI be performed on all women with newly diagnosed, early stage breast cancer? Houssami N, Hayes DF, CA Cancer J Clin 2009 59 290 302 10.3322/caac.20028 19679690
20. Influence of imaging on clinical decision making in the treatment of lower back pain. Gillan MGC, Gilbert FJ, Andrew JE, Grant AM, Wardlaw D, Valentine NW, et al. Radiology 2001 220 393 399 11477242 (Pubitemid 32667175)
21. Low back pain: Influence of early MR imaging or CT on treatment and outcome-Multicenter randomized trial. Gilbert FJ, Grant AM, Gillan MGC, Vale LD, Campbell MK, Scott NW, et al. Radiology 2004 231 343 351 10.1148/radiol. 2312030886 15031430 (Pubitemid 38552887)
22. A prospective cluster-randomized trial to implement the Canadian CT Head Rule in emergency departments. Stiell IG, Clement CM, Grimshaw JM, Brison RJ, Rowe BH, Lee JS, et al. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2010 182 1527 1532 10.1503/cmaj.091974 20732978
23. The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG, Ann Intern Med 2001 134 657 662 11304106 (Pubitemid 32322244)
24. The utility of F-18-FDG PET for suspected recurrent non-small cell lung cancer after potentially curative therapy: Impact on management and prognostic stratification. Hicks RJ, Kalff V, Macmanus MP, Ware RE, McKenzie AF, Matthews JP, et al. J Nucl Med 2001 42 1605 1613 11696628 (Pubitemid 33131318)
25. Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: Initial results from the national oncologic PET registry. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D, Shields AF, Gareen IF, Hanna L, et al. J Clin Oncol 2008 26 2155 2161 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.5631 18362365
26. Relationship Between Cancer Type and Impact of PET and PET/CT on Intended Management: Findings of the National Oncologic PET Registry. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Shields AF, Liu D, Gareen IF, Hunt E, et al. J Nucl Med 2008 49 1928 1935 10.2967/jnumed.108.056713 18997054
27. PET changes management and improves prognostic stratification in patients with head and neck cancer: results of a multicenter prospective study. Scott AM, Gunawardana DH, Bartholomeusz D, Ramshaw JE, Lin P, J Nucl Med 2008 49 1593 1600 10.2967/jnumed.108.053660 18794254
28. The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR): Design and analysis plan. Hillner BE, Liu D, Coleman RE, Shields AF, Gareen IF, Hanna L, et al. J Nucl Med 2007 48 1901 1908 10.2967/jnumed.107.043687 17942807 (Pubitemid 350099337)
29. Reduction in downstream test utilization following introduction of coronary computed tomography in a cardiology practice. Karlsberg RP, Budoff MJ, Thomson LE, Friedman JD, Berman DS, Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2010 26 359 366 10.1007/s10554-009-9547-x 19967562
30. Comparative effectiveness of MRI in breast cancer (COMICE) trial: a randomised controlled trial. Turnbull L, Brown S, Harvey I, Olivier C, Drew P, Napp V, et al. Lancet 2010 375 563 571 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)62070-5 20159292