Literature DB >> 15850636

Refining clinical diagnosis with likelihood ratios.

David A Grimes1, Kenneth F Schulz.   

Abstract

Likelihood ratios can refine clinical diagnosis on the basis of signs and symptoms; however, they are underused for patients' care. A likelihood ratio is the percentage of ill people with a given test result divided by the percentage of well individuals with the same result. Ideally, abnormal test results should be much more typical in ill individuals than in those who are well (high likelihood ratio) and normal test results should be most frequent in well people than in sick people (low likelihood ratio). Likelihood ratios near unity have little effect on decision-making; by contrast, high or low ratios can greatly shift the clinician's estimate of the probability of disease. Likelihood ratios can be calculated not only for dichotomous (positive or negative) tests but also for tests with multiple levels of results, such as creatine kinase or ventilation-perfusion scans. When combined with an accurate clinical diagnosis, likelihood ratios from ancillary tests improve diagnostic accuracy in a synergistic manner.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15850636     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66422-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  175 in total

1.  Association between stillbirth and risk factors known at pregnancy confirmation.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Diagnostic validity of the use of a portable single-channel electromyography device for sleep bruxism.

Authors:  Juliana Stuginski-Barbosa; André Luís Porporatti; Yuri Martins Costa; Peter Svensson; Paulo César Rodrigues Conti
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 2.816

Review 3.  Pros and cons of screening for occult Cushing syndrome.

Authors:  Antoine Tabarin; Paul Perez
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2011-03-22       Impact factor: 43.330

4.  [Early diagnosis of rheumatic diseases--relevance and challenges].

Authors:  Joachim Sieper; Martin Rudwaleit
Journal:  Z Rheumatol       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.372

5.  Diagnosis and diagnostic testing in primary care.

Authors:  Colin McCowan; Tom Fahey
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 5.386

6.  Clinical prediction rule for return to work after back pain.

Authors:  Christopher Maher
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2005-06-07       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 7.  Natriuretic peptides in the diagnosis and management of heart failure.

Authors:  G Michael Felker; John W Petersen; Daniel B Mark
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-09-12       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Diagnostic tools for tackling febrile illness and enhancing patient management.

Authors:  Konstantinos Mitsakakis; Valérie D'Acremont; Sebastian Hin; Felix von Stetten; Roland Zengerle
Journal:  Microelectron Eng       Date:  2018-10-05       Impact factor: 2.523

9.  Comparative Accuracy of Developmental Screening Questionnaires.

Authors:  R Christopher Sheldrick; Susan Marakovitz; Daryl Garfinkel; Alice S Carter; Ellen C Perrin
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 16.193

10.  A clinical decision rule to aid ordering of serum and urine protein electrophoresis for case-finding of paraproteins in hospitalized inpatients.

Authors:  Ammarin Thakkinstian; Huy Tran; Glenn Reeves; Stuart Murch; John Attia
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-07-30       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.