Literature DB >> 22203270

The validation of screening tests: meet the new screen same as the old screen?

Blase Gambino1.   

Abstract

The focus of this report is to examine the process of validation of new screening tests designed to detect the problem gambler in research and practice settings. A hierarchical or phases of evaluation model is presented as a conceptual framework to describe the basic features of the validation process and its implications for application and interpretation of test results. The report describes a number of threats to validity in the form of sources of unintended bias that when unrecognized may lead to incorrect interpretations of study results and the drawing of incorrect conclusions about the usefulness of the new screening tests. Examples drawn from the gambling literature on problem gambling are used to illustrate some of the more important concepts including spectrum bias and clinical variation in test accuracy. The concept of zones of severity and the bias inherent in selecting criterion thresholds are reviewed. A definition of reference or study gold standard is provided. The use of 2-stage designs to establish validity by efficiently using reference standards to determine indices of accuracy and prevalence is recommended.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22203270     DOI: 10.1007/s10899-011-9285-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gambl Stud        ISSN: 1050-5350


  59 in total

1.  Categorical versus dimensional approaches to diagnosis: methodological challenges.

Authors:  Helena Chmura Kraemer; Art Noda; Ruth O'Hara
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.791

Review 2.  The use of "overall accuracy" to evaluate the validity of screening or diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Anthony J Alberg; Ji Wan Park; Brant W Hager; Malcolm V Brock; Marie Diener-West
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  With or without a gold standard.

Authors:  Ruth M Pfeiffer; Philip E Castle
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  Risk of harm among gamblers in the general population as a function of level of participation in gambling activities.

Authors:  Shawn R Currie; David C Hodgins; JianLi Wang; Nady el-Guebaly; Harold Wynne; Sophie Chen
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 6.526

5.  Development and psychometric evaluation of the gambling treatment outcome monitoring system (GAMTOMS).

Authors:  Randy Stinchfield; Ken C Winters; Andria Botzet; Sarah Jerstad; Jessie Breyer
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2007-06

Review 6.  A principled approach to setting optimal diagnostic thresholds: where ROC and indifference curves meet.

Authors:  R John Irwin; Timothy C Irwin
Journal:  Eur J Intern Med       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 4.487

7.  The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): a new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers.

Authors:  H R Lesieur; S B Blume
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 18.112

8.  Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research. Getting better but still not good.

Authors:  M C Reid; M S Lachs; A R Feinstein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995 Aug 23-30       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Is the SOGS an accurate measure of pathological gambling among children, adolescents and adults?

Authors:  R Ladouceur; C Bouchard; N Rhéaume; C Jacques; F Ferland; J Leblond; M Walker
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2000

10.  The South Oaks Gambling Screen-revised Adolescent (SOGS-RA) revisited: a cut-point analysis.

Authors:  Brock Boudreau; Christiane Poulin
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2007-09
View more
  4 in total

1.  Setting criterion thresholds for estimating prevalence: what is being validated?

Authors:  Blase Gambino
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2014-09

2.  Decoding Problem Gamblers' Signals: A Decision Model for Casino Enterprises.

Authors:  Sandra Ifrim
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2015-12

3.  Test Performance Variation Between Settings and Populations.

Authors:  Blase Gambino
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2018-12

4.  Reliability, Validity, and Classification Accuracy of the DSM-5 Diagnostic Criteria for Gambling Disorder and Comparison to DSM-IV.

Authors:  Randy Stinchfield; John McCready; Nigel E Turner; Susana Jimenez-Murcia; Nancy M Petry; Jon Grant; John Welte; Heather Chapman; Ken C Winters
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2016-09
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.