Literature DB >> 22829313

Quantifying the accuracy of a diagnostic test or marker.

Kristian Linnet1, Patrick M M Bossuyt, Karel G M Moons, Johannes B R Reitsma.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In recent years, increasing focus has been directed to the methodology for evaluating (new) tests or biomarkers. A key step in the evaluation of a diagnostic test is the investigation into its accuracy. CONTENT: We reviewed the literature on how to assess the accuracy of diagnostic tests. Accuracy refers to the amount of agreement between the results of the test under evaluation (index test) and the results of a reference standard or test. The generally recommended approach is to use a prospective cohort design in patients who are suspected of having the disease of interest, in which each individual undergoes the index and same reference standard tests. This approach presents several challenges, including the problems that can arise with the verification of the index test results by the preferred reference standard test, the choice of cutoff value in case of a continuous index test result, and the determination of how to translate accuracy results to recommendations for clinical use. This first in a series of 4 reports presents an overview of the designs of single-test accuracy studies and the concepts of specificity, sensitivity, posterior probabilities (i.e., predictive values) for the presence of target disease, ROC curves, and likelihood ratios, all illustrated with empirical data from a study on the diagnosis of suspected deep venous thrombosis. Limitations of the concept of the diagnostic accuracy for a single test are also highlighted.
CONCLUSIONS: The prospective cohort design in patients suspected of having the disease of interest is the optimal approach to estimate the accuracy of a diagnostic test. However, the accuracy of a diagnostic index test is not constant but varies across different clinical contexts, disease spectrums, and even patient subgroups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22829313     DOI: 10.1373/clinchem.2012.182543

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem        ISSN: 0009-9147            Impact factor:   8.327


  46 in total

Review 1.  Biomarker tests for risk assessment in coronary artery disease: will they change clinical practice?

Authors:  Johannes Mair; Allan S Jaffe
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.074

2.  Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests.

Authors:  Brendan J Barrett; John M Fardy
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2021

Review 3.  Contrast-enhanced pulmonary MRA for the primary diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: current state of the art and future directions.

Authors:  Donald G Benson; Mark L Schiebler; Michael D Repplinger; Christopher J François; Thomas M Grist; Scott B Reeder; Scott K Nagle
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Direct and Functional Biomarkers of Vitamin B6 Status.

Authors:  Per Magne Ueland; Arve Ulvik; Luisa Rios-Avila; Øivind Midttun; Jesse F Gregory
Journal:  Annu Rev Nutr       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 11.848

Review 5.  Proteomic studies of urinary biomarkers for prostate, bladder and kidney cancers.

Authors:  Steven L Wood; Margaret A Knowles; Douglas Thompson; Peter J Selby; Rosamonde E Banks
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-02-26       Impact factor: 14.432

6.  Screening and identification of RhD antigen mimic epitopes from a phage display random peptide library for the serodiagnosis of haemolytic disease of the foetus and newborn.

Authors:  Jiao Wang; Jingjing Song; Shuimei Zhou; Yourong Fu; Jeffrey A Bailey; Changxin Shen
Journal:  Blood Transfus       Date:  2018-01-16       Impact factor: 3.443

7.  Test Performance Variation Between Settings and Populations.

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

8.  [18F]FDG PET/CT in non-union: improving the diagnostic performances by using both PET and CT criteria.

Authors:  Martina Sollini; Nicoletta Trenti; Emiliano Malagoli; Marco Catalano; Lorenzo Di Mento; Alexander Kirienko; Marco Berlusconi; Arturo Chiti; Lidija Antunovic
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Epitope mapping of the HSP83.1 protein of Leishmania braziliensis discloses novel targets for immunodiagnosis of tegumentary and visceral clinical forms of leishmaniasis.

Authors:  Daniel Menezes-Souza; Tiago Antônio de Oliveira Mendes; Matheus de Souza Gomes; João Luís Reis-Cunha; Ronaldo Alves Pinto Nagem; Cláudia Martins Carneiro; Eduardo Antônio Ferraz Coelho; Lúcia Maria da Cunha Galvão; Ricardo Toshio Fujiwara; Daniella Castanheira Bartholomeu
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2014-05-07

10.  Surgeon-defined assessment is a poor predictor of knee balance in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, multicenter study.

Authors:  Samuel J MacDessi; Jil A Wood; Ashish D Diwan; Ian A Harris
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.