Literature DB >> 11576811

Sensitivity and specificity of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to identify the overuse and underuse of coronary revascularization and hysterectomy.

P G Shekelle1, R E Park, J P Kahan, L L Leape, C J Kamberg, S J Bernstein.   

Abstract

There is no empirical evidence on the sensitivity and specificity of methods to identify the possible overuse and underuse of medical procedures. To estimate the sensitivity and specificity of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Parallel three-way replication of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method for each of two procedures, coronary revascularization and hysterectomy. Maximum likelihood estimates of the sensitivity and specificity of the method for each procedure. These values were then used to re-calculate past estimates of overuse and underuse, correcting for the error rate in the appropriateness method. The sensitivity of detecting overuse of coronary revascularization was 68% (95% confidence interval 60-76%) and the specificity was 99% (98-100%). The corresponding values for hysterectomy were 89% (85-94%) and 86% (83-89%). The sensitivity and specificity of detecting the underuse of coronary revascularization were 94% (92-95%) and 97% (96-98%), respectively. Past applications of the appropriateness method have overestimated the prevalence of the overuse of hysterectomy, underestimated the prevalence of the overuse of the coronary revascularization, and provided true estimates of the underuse of revascularization. The sensitivity and specificity of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method vary according to the procedure assessed and appear to estimate the underuse of procedures more accurately than their overuse.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11576811     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00365-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  17 in total

Review 1.  [Consensus methods: review of original methods and their main alternatives used in public health].

Authors:  F Bourrée; P Michel; L R Salmi
Journal:  Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique       Date:  2008-11-13       Impact factor: 1.019

2.  Evidence-based imaging guidelines and Medicare payment policy.

Authors:  Christopher L Sistrom; Niccie L McKay
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 3.  2012 update of the 2008 American College of Rheumatology recommendations for the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologic agents in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Jasvinder A Singh; Daniel E Furst; Aseem Bharat; Jeffrey R Curtis; Arthur F Kavanaugh; Joel M Kremer; Larry W Moreland; James O'Dell; Kevin L Winthrop; Timothy Beukelman; S Louis Bridges; W Winn Chatham; Harold E Paulus; Maria Suarez-Almazor; Claire Bombardier; Maxime Dougados; Dinesh Khanna; Charles M King; Amye L Leong; Eric L Matteson; John T Schousboe; Eileen Moynihan; Karen S Kolba; Archana Jain; Elizabeth R Volkmann; Harsh Agrawal; Sangmee Bae; Amy S Mudano; Nivedita M Patkar; Kenneth G Saag
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.794

4.  Follow-up intervals in patients with Cushing's disease: recommendations from a panel of experienced pituitary clinicians.

Authors:  Eliza B Geer; Alejandro Ayala; Vivien Bonert; John D Carmichael; Murray B Gordon; Laurence Katznelson; Ekaterina Manuylova; Ismat Shafiq; Vijaya Surampudi; Ronald S Swerdloff; Michael S Broder; Dasha Cherepanov; Marianne Eagan; Jackie Lee; Qayyim Said; Maureen P Neary; Beverly M K Biller
Journal:  Pituitary       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.107

Review 5.  Which fractures are most attributable to osteoporosis?

Authors:  Amy H Warriner; Nivedita M Patkar; Jeffrey R Curtis; Elizabeth Delzell; Lisa Gary; Meredith Kilgore; Ken Saag
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 6.  Methods of formal consensus in classification/diagnostic criteria and guideline development.

Authors:  Raj Nair; Rohit Aggarwal; Dinesh Khanna
Journal:  Semin Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2011-03-21       Impact factor: 5.532

7.  Using surgical appropriateness criteria to examine outcomes of total knee arthroplasty in a United States sample.

Authors:  Daniel L Riddle; Robert A Perera; William A Jiranek; Levent Dumenci
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.794

8.  Development, validation and testing of an epidemiological case definition of interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome.

Authors:  Sandra H Berry; Laura M Bogart; Chau Pham; Karin Liu; Leroy Nyberg; Michael Stoto; Marika Suttorp; J Quentin Clemens
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-03-29       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Assessment of pancreatic cancer care in the United States based on formally developed quality indicators.

Authors:  Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; Keith D Lillemoe; Mark S Talamonti; Clifford Y Ko
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  What studies are appropriate and necessary for staging gastric adenocarcinoma? Results of an international RAND/UCLA expert panel.

Authors:  Matthew Dixon; Roberta Cardoso; Jill Tinmouth; Lucy Helyer; Calvin Law; Carol Swallow; Lawrence Paszat; Robin McLeod; Rajini Seevaratnam; Alyson Mahar; Natalie G Coburn
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 7.370

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.