Literature DB >> 26495411

Evidence Based Emergency Medicine Part 3: Positive and Negative Likelihood Ratios of Diagnostic Tests.

Alireza Baratloo1, Saeed Safari1, Mohamed Elfil2, Ahmed Negida3.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2015        PMID: 26495411      PMCID: PMC4608341     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg (Tehran)        ISSN: 2345-4563


× No keyword cloud information.

Introduction:

In the previous two parts of educational manuscript series in Emergency, we explained some screening characteristics of diagnostic tests including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (1, 2). In the 3rd part we aimed to explain positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR) as one of the most reliable performance measures of a diagnostic test (3). To better understand this characteristic of a test, it is first necessary to fully understand the concept of sensitivity and specificity. So we strongly advise you to review the 1st part of this series again (1, 2). In short, the likelihood ratios are about the percentage of people with and without a disease but having the same test result (4). The prevalence of a disease can directly influence screening characteristics of a diagnostic test, especially its sensitivity and specificity. Trying to eliminate this effect, LR was developed. Pre-test probability of a disease multiplied by positive or negative LR can estimate post-test probability. Therefore, LR is the most important characteristic of a test to rule out or rule in a diagnosis. A positive likelihood ratio > 1 means higher probability of the disease to be present in a patient with a positive test. The further from 1, either higher or lower, the stronger the evidence to rule in or rule out the disease, respectively (5). It is obvious that tests with LR close to one are less practical. On the other hand, LR further from one will have more value for application in medicine. Usually tests with 0.1 < LR > 10 are considered suitable for implication in routine practice. Calculation: It is the ratio of probability of a patient with a disease and having positive test result divided by probability of a patient without a disease but having positive test result (7). It can be directly calculated from this equation: Example 1: Imagine that there is a diagnostic test, which has sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 60%, respectively. In this scenario, the positive likelihood ratio of this test will be calculated as follows: LR+ = 0.80/ (1-0.60) = 0.80/ 0.40 = 2 It is the ratio of probability of a patient with a disease and having positive test result divided by probability of a patient without a disease but having positive test result (5). It can be directly calculated from this equation: Example 2: Imagine that we have a diagnostic test with sensitivity and specificity of 90% and 70%, respectively. In this case, the negative likelihood ratio is calculated as follows: LR − = (1-0.9)/ 0.7 = 0.1/0.7 = 0.14 Example 3: In the study by Aminiahidashti et al., the sensitivity and the specificity of the ascites fluid appearance as a diagnostic test for the detection of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis were 46.9% and 87.5%, respectively (6). So, positive and negative likelihood ratios of this test can be calculated as follows: LR + = 46.9 % / (1 - 87.5%) = 0.469 / (1- 0.875) = 0.469 / 0.125 = 3.8 LR − = (1- 0.469) / 0.857 = 0.531 / 0.875 = 0.6 Example 4: In Taghizadieh et al. study, chest X-Ray in diagnosis of pleural effusion had sensitivity and specificity of 66.7% and 77.8%, respectively (7). Given this data, the LR + and LR – can be calculated as follows: LR + = 0.667/ (1-0.778) = 0.667/ 0. 222 = 3 LR − = (1-0.667)/ 0.778 = 0.333/ 0.778 = 0.4
  7 in total

1.  Simplifying likelihood ratios.

Authors:  Steven McGee
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 2.  Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios.

Authors:  Jonathan J Deeks; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-07-17

3.  Refining clinical diagnosis with likelihood ratios.

Authors:  David A Grimes; Kenneth F Schulz
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Apr 23-29       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Evidence Based Emergency Medicine Part 2: Positive and negative predictive values of diagnostic tests.

Authors:  Saeed Safari; Alireza Baratloo; Mohamed Elfil; Ahmed Negida
Journal:  Emerg (Tehran)       Date:  2015

5.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Chest x-Ray and Ultrasonography in Detection of Community Acquired Pneumonia; a Brief Report.

Authors:  Ali Taghizadieh; Alireza Ala; Farzad Rahmani; Akbar Nadi
Journal:  Emerg (Tehran)       Date:  2015

6.  Part 1: Simple Definition and Calculation of Accuracy, Sensitivity and Specificity.

Authors:  Alireza Baratloo; Mostafa Hosseini; Ahmed Negida; Gehad El Ashal
Journal:  Emerg (Tehran)       Date:  2015

7.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Ascites Fluid Gross Appearance in Detection of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis.

Authors:  Hamed Aminiahidashti; Seyed Mohammad Hosseininejad; Hosein Montazer; Farzad Bozorgi; Iraj Goli Khatir; Fateme Jahanian; Behnaz Raee
Journal:  Emerg (Tehran)       Date:  2014
  7 in total
  5 in total

1.  Diagnostic Assessment of septin9 DNA Methylation for Colorectal Cancer Using Blood Detection: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Gongping Sun; Jin Meng; He Duan; Dewei Zhang; Yuanxin Tang
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 3.201

2.  Evidence Based Emergency Medicine; Part 4: Pre-test and Post-test Probabilities and Fagan's nomogram.

Authors:  Saeed Safari; Alireza Baratloo; Mohamed Elfil; Ahmed Negida
Journal:  Emerg (Tehran)       Date:  2016

3.  A comparison of conventional rapid methods in diagnosis of superficial and cutaneous mycoses based on KOH, Chicago sky blue 6B and calcofluor white stains.

Authors:  Parvaneh Afshar; Laleh Vahedi Larijani; Hamed Rouhanizadeh
Journal:  Iran J Microbiol       Date:  2018-12

4.  Hip-Spine Syndrome: The Coronal Alignment of the Lumbar Spine and Pelvis in Patients with Ankylosed Hips.

Authors:  Tadatsugu Morimoto; Motoki Sonohata; Masaru Kitajima; Tomohito Yoshihara; Hirohito Hirata; Masaaki Mawatari
Journal:  Spine Surg Relat Res       Date:  2019-04-26

5.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Plasma Ghrelin Concentrations in Pediatric Sepsis-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Single-Center Cohort Study.

Authors:  Xiu Yuan; Shaojun Li; Liang Zhou; Tian Tang; Yuwei Cheng; Xiaoxiao Ao; Liping Tan
Journal:  Front Pediatr       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 3.418

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.