Literature DB >> 1607897

Sensitivity and specificity of a single diagnostic test in the presence of work-up bias.

B C Choi1.   

Abstract

A diagnostic test is put into routine use by being applied to a population with unknown test status and unknown disease status. All subjects with a positive test are then referred to a "gold standard" assessment for the disease. Subjects with a negative test are normally not referred to the "gold standard" assessment. In some cases, the investigators may refer a small random sample of subjects with a negative test to the "gold standard" assessment in order to determine if they really do not have the disease. If "gold standard" results are not available on an entire population, it is well-known that work-up bias, or sequential-ordering bias, exists. In this situation, classical equations for sensitivity and specificity give biased results. This paper describes an equation for estimation of prevalence, and two new equations which calculate sensitivity and specificity from prevalence and predictive values, and which are appropriate for data from this type of "irregular observational design".

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1607897     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90129-b

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


  26 in total

Review 1.  Effect of verification bias on the sensitivity of fecal occult blood testing: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alan S Rosman; Mark A Korsten
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-05-25       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Measurement of the validity of a preschool vision screening program.

Authors:  B Robinson; W R Bobier; E Martin; L Bryant
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Changes of FibroScan, APRI, and FIB-4 in chronic hepatitis B patients with significant liver histological changes receiving 3-year entecavir therapy.

Authors:  Qiang Li; Liang Chen; Yu Zhou
Journal:  Clin Exp Med       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 3.984

4.  How to appraise a diagnostic test.

Authors:  Mohit Bhandari; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Three studies on self-report scales to detect bipolar disorder.

Authors:  Christopher J Miller; Sheri L Johnson; Thomas R Kwapil; Charles S Carver
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2010-08-08       Impact factor: 4.839

Review 6.  How to evaluate emerging technologies in cervical cancer screening?

Authors:  Marc Arbyn; Guglielmo Ronco; Jack Cuzick; Nicolas Wentzensen; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Test characteristics of orthoptic screening examination in 3 year old kindergarten children.

Authors:  J-C Barry; H-H König
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.638

8.  Globulin-platelet model predicts significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in CHB patients with high HBV DNA and mildly elevated alanine transaminase levels.

Authors:  Qiang Li; Chuan Lu; Weixia Li; Yuxian Huang; Liang Chen
Journal:  Clin Exp Med       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 3.984

9.  How to appraise a diagnostic test.

Authors:  Ramanitharan Manikandan; Lalgudi N Dorairajan
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2011-10

10.  A Novel Prediction Model of COVID-19 Progression: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Wei Xu; ChenLu Huang; Ling Fei; WeiXia Li; XuDong Xie; Qiang Li; Liang Chen
Journal:  Infect Dis Ther       Date:  2021-06-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.