Literature DB >> 11867773

Study design for concurrent development, assessment, and implementation of new diagnostic imaging technology.

M G Myriam Hunink1, Gabriel P Krestin.   

Abstract

With current constraints on health care resources and emphasis on value for money, new diagnostic imaging technologies must be assessed and their value demonstrated. The state of the art in the field of diagnostic imaging technology assessment advocates a hierarchical step-by-step approach. Although rigorous, such a hierarchical assessment is time-consuming, and, given the current rapid advances in technology, results are often too late to influence management and policy decisions. The purpose of this article is to discuss a study design in which development, assessment, and implementation of new diagnostic imaging technology take place concurrently in one integrated process. An empirically based pragmatic study design is proposed for imaging technology assessment. To minimize bias and enable comparison with current technology, a randomized controlled design is used whenever feasible and ethical. Outcome measures should reflect the clinical decision-making process based on imaging information and acceptance of the new test. Outcome measures can include additional imaging studies requested, costs of diagnostic work-up and treatment, physicians' confidence in therapeutic decision making, recruitment rate, and patient outcome measures related to the clinical problem. The key feature of the proposed study design is analysis of trends in outcome measures over time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11867773     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2223010335

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  13 in total

1.  Do we need randomised trials to evaluate diagnostic procedures? For.

Authors:  H Van Tinteren; O S Hoekstra; M Boers
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-11-29       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  MDCT for suspected pulmonary embolism: multi-institutional survey of 16-MDCT data acquisition protocols.

Authors:  Pamela T Johnson; David Naidich; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2006-11-29

3.  Health-economic evaluation of three imaging strategies in patients with suspected colorectal liver metastases: Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI vs. extracellular contrast media-enhanced MRI and 3-phase MDCT in Germany, Italy and Sweden.

Authors:  C J Zech; L Grazioli; E Jonas; M Ekman; R Niebecker; S Gschwend; J Breuer; L Jönsson; S Kienbaum
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Health technology assessment: principles, methods and current status.

Authors:  A Giovagnoni; L Bartolucci; A Manna; J Morbiducci; G Ascoli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 3.469

5.  Evidence-based radiology: why and how?

Authors:  Francesco Sardanelli; Myriam G Hunink; Fiona J Gilbert; Giovanni Di Leo; Gabriel P Krestin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Too much of a good thing is wonderful? A conceptual analysis of excessive examinations and diagnostic futility in diagnostic radiology.

Authors:  Bjørn Hofmann
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2010-05

7.  Evidence-based radiology: how to quickly assess the validity and strength of publications in the diagnostic radiology literature.

Authors:  Jonathan D Dodd; Peter M MacEneaney; Dermot E Malone
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-11-11       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Acceptance of noninvasive computed tomography coronary angiography: for a patient-friendly medicine.

Authors:  Ludovico La Grutta; Sabina La Grutta; Massimo Galia; Giuseppe Lo Piccolo; Giovanni Gentile; Giuseppe La Tona; Maria Stella Epifanio; Erica Maffei; Filippo Cademartiri; Rosa Lo Baido; Roberto Lagalla; Massimo Midiri
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  Cost-effectiveness of laser Doppler imaging in burn care in the Netherlands.

Authors:  M Jenda Hop; Jakob Hiddingh; Carlijn Stekelenburg; Hester C Kuipers; Esther Middelkoop; Marianne K Nieuwenhuis; Suzanne Polinder; Margriet E van Baar
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 2.102

Review 10.  New technologies in screening for breast cancer: a systematic review of their accuracy.

Authors:  L Irwig; N Houssami; C van Vliet
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-06-01       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.