Literature DB >> 12873643

Diagnostic research on routine care data: prospects and problems.

Rianne Oostenbrink1, Karel G M Moons, Sacha E Bleeker, Henriëtte A Moll, Diederick E Grobbee.   

Abstract

A diagnosis in practice is a sequential process starting with a patient with a particular set of signs and symptoms. To serve practice, diagnostic research should aim to quantify the added value of a test to clinical information that is commonly available before the test will be applied. Routine care databases commonly include all documented patient information, and therefore seem to be suitable to quantify a tests' added value to prior information. It is well known, however, that retrospective use of routine care data in diagnostic research may cause various methodologic problems. But, given the increased attention of electronic patient records including data from routine patient care, we believe it is time to reconsider these problems. We discuss four problems related to routine care databases. First, most databases do not label patients by their symptoms or signs but by their final diagnosis. Second, in routine care the diagnostic workup of a patient is by definition determined by previous diagnostic (test) results. Therefore, routinely documented data are subject to so-called workup bias. Third, in practice, the reference test is always interpreted with knowledge of the preceding test information, such that in scientific studies using routine data the diagnostic value of a test under evaluation is commonly overestimated. Fourth, routinely documented databases are likely to suffer from missing data. Per problem we discuss methods that are presently available and may (partly) overcome each problem. All this could contribute to more frequent and appropriate use of routine care data in diagnostic research. The discussed methods to overcome the above problems may well be similarly useful to prospective diagnostic studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12873643     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(03)00080-5

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


  13 in total

1.  Testing bias in clinical databases: methodological considerations.

Authors:  Karin J Velthove; Hubert Gm Leufkens; Patrick C Souverein; René C Schweizer; Wouter W van Solinge
Journal:  Emerg Themes Epidemiol       Date:  2010-05-14

2.  Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Anne W S Rutjes; Johannes B Reitsma; Marcello Di Nisio; Nynke Smidt; Jeroen C van Rijn; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-02-14       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Predictive value of interferon-γ release assays for incident active tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Molebogeng X Rangaka; Katalin A Wilkinson; Judith R Glynn; Daphne Ling; Dick Menzies; Judith Mwansa-Kambafwile; Katherine Fielding; Robert J Wilkinson; Madhukar Pai
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2011-08-16       Impact factor: 25.071

4.  Critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies: the CHARMS checklist.

Authors:  Karel G M Moons; Joris A H de Groot; Walter Bouwmeester; Yvonne Vergouwe; Susan Mallett; Douglas G Altman; Johannes B Reitsma; Gary S Collins
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 11.069

5.  External validation and extension of a diagnostic model for obstructive coronary artery disease: a cross-sectional predictive evaluation in 4888 patients of the Austrian Coronary Artery disease Risk Determination In Innsbruck by diaGnostic ANgiography (CARDIIGAN) cohort.

Authors:  Michael Edlinger; Maria Wanitschek; Jakob Dörler; Hanno Ulmer; Hannes F Alber; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Comparison of techniques for handling missing covariate data within prognostic modelling studies: a simulation study.

Authors:  Andrea Marshall; Douglas G Altman; Patrick Royston; Roger L Holder
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Advantages of the nested case-control design in diagnostic research.

Authors:  Cornelis J Biesheuvel; Yvonne Vergouwe; Ruud Oudega; Arno W Hoes; Diederick E Grobbee; Karel G M Moons
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2008-07-21       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 8.  Views of healthcare professionals to linkage of routinely collected healthcare data: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Y M Hopf; C Bond; J Francis; J Haughney; P J Helms
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 4.497

9.  Linking NHS data for pediatric pharmacovigilance: Results of a Delphi survey.

Authors:  Y M Hopf; J Francis; P J Helms; J Haughney; C Bond
Journal:  Res Social Adm Pharm       Date:  2015-07-02

10.  Diagnostic test strategies in children at increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease in primary care.

Authors:  Gea A Holtman; Yvonne Lisman-van Leeuwen; Boudewijn J Kollen; Obbe F Norbruis; Johanna C Escher; Laurence C Walhout; Angelika Kindermann; Yolanda B de Rijke; Patrick F van Rheenen; Marjolein Y Berger
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-06       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.