Literature DB >> 17518802

Bridging the gap between clinical practice and diagnostic clinical epidemiology: pilot experiences with a didactic model based on a logarithmic scale.

Jef Van den Ende1, Zeno Bisoffi, Hugo Van Puymbroek, Patrick Van der Stuyft, Alfons Van Gompel, Anselm Derese, Lutgarde Lynen, Juan Moreira, Paul Adriaan Jan Janssen.   

Abstract

Rationale From general practitioners to academic staff, clinicians continue to have difficulties in applying clinical epidemiology in their everyday work. They do not fully understand the logical rules behind the numbers and they do not recognize these rules in their work. We present a new model where the pre-test and the post-test probabilities are converted to log10 of odds, and the likelihood ratio (LR) to its own log10. Methods Following Bayes' theorem, adding the log10LR to the log10 pre-test odds gives the log10 post-test odds, which can easily be represented on a logarithmic scale. In addition, by rounding the log10LR to half the unit, we create classes of discriminative power of tests, close to intuitive estimation. This model generates also a user-friendly diagram, adding considerably to the understanding of Bayes' theorem. We evaluated the effect of the rounding, the current use of the classical model and the acceptability of the new model. Results Rounding 10 disease characteristics to half the unit gives an absolute error of less than half a unit. After six explanations of Bayes' theorem, only 6/16 medical students were capable of answering simple questions about predictive value. When asked about weight of disease characteristics, no one of the 50 clinicians mentioned sensitivity, specificity, predictive value or LR. With the new model, more than 80% of trainees found medical decision making easier to understand and recognized the theory in their practice. Conclusions We conclude that our model of diagnostic clinical epidemiology offers a logical environment for an easy and rapid assessment of the evolution of disease probability with consecutive tests, providing a scientific format for 'qualitative' clinical estimations.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17518802     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00710.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  6 in total

1.  Does prevalence matter to physicians in estimating post-test probability of disease? A randomized trial.

Authors:  Thomas Agoritsas; Delphine S Courvoisier; Christophe Combescure; Marie Deom; Thomas V Perneger
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-11-04       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Educating osteopaths to be researchers - what role should research methods and statistics have in an undergraduate curriculum?

Authors:  John C Licciardone
Journal:  Int J Osteopath Med       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.149

3.  Is increasing complexity of algorithms the price for higher accuracy? virtual comparison of three algorithms for tertiary level management of chronic cough in people living with HIV in a low-income country.

Authors:  Constance Mukabatsinda; Jasmine Nguyen; Bettina Bisig; Lutgarde Lynen; Yerma D Coppens; Anita Asiimwe; Jef Van den Ende
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2012-01-19       Impact factor: 2.796

Review 4.  A Review of the Application of Information Theory to Clinical Diagnostic Testing.

Authors:  William A Benish
Journal:  Entropy (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 2.524

5.  Should malaria treatment be guided by a point of care rapid test? A threshold approach to malaria management in rural Burkina Faso.

Authors:  Zeno Bisoffi; Halidou Tinto; Bienvenu Sodiomon Sirima; Federico Gobbi; Andrea Angheben; Dora Buonfrate; Jef Van den Ende
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Rational use of Xpert testing in patients with presumptive TB: clinicians should be encouraged to use the test-treat threshold.

Authors:  Tom Decroo; Aquiles R Henríquez-Trujillo; Anja De Weggheleire; Lutgarde Lynen
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2017-10-11       Impact factor: 3.090

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.