Literature DB >> 8691222

The importance of work-up (verification) bias correction in assessing the accuracy of SPECT thallium-201 testing for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease.

M P Cecil1, A S Kosinski, M T Jones, A Taylor, N P Alazraki, R I Pettigrew, W S Weintraub.   

Abstract

Noninvasive testing is often evaluated by the sensitivity and specificity in comparison with a more invasive, but more definitive "gold" standard. However, work-up or verification bias, which occurs when the results of a noninvasive test impact the decision to perform the gold standard invasive test, increases the "observed" sensitivity and decreases the "observed" specificity of the noninvasive test. Most large clinical studies utilizing a noninvasive technique to diagnose coronary artery disease have biases, particularly work-up bias. To obtain more accurate measurements of sensitivity and specificity, we determined the observed sensitivity and specificity of stress (exercise and dipyridamole) single photon emission computed tomographic (SPECT) thallium testing for the detection of coronary artery disease by angiography, and then applied previously published equations to correct for work-up bias. From a computerized data base, reports of 4354 stress SPECT thallium studies from January 1, 1986 through December 31, 1992 were reviewed. All patients with a known history of myocardial infarction or prior coronary angiography were excluded, leaving 2688 patients. From this total, 471 patients underwent coronary angiography within 90 days following stress SPECT thallium testing. Coronary artery disease was defined as a visually assessed stenosis of a coronary artery or a major branch > 50%. Of the 2688 stress SPECT thallium studies, 1265 were normal and 1423 were abnormal. For the 471 patients who underwent catheterization within 90 days following stress SPECT thallium testing. the "observed" sensitivity and specificity were 98 and 14%, respectively. After correction for work-up bias, the corrected sensitivity and specificity were 82 +/- 6% and 59 +/- 2%, respectively. Most studies utilizing noninvasive technologies for the detection of coronary artery disease include patients with known coronary artery disease and have work-up bias as well. By knowing the thallium results of patients with and without catheterization, we were able to correct for work-up bias. These data provide better estimate of the sensitivity and specificity of stress SPECT thallium testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8691222     DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(96)00014-5

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


  9 in total

1.  Diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging in a study population without post-test referral bias.

Authors:  Allan Johansen; Poul Flemming Høilund-Carlsen; Henrik Wulff Christensen; Werner Vach; Henrik Boel Jørgensen; Annegrete Veje; Torben Haghfelt
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 2.  Evaluation of ischemic heart disease.

Authors:  Dipan J Shah; Han W Kim; Raymond J Kim
Journal:  Heart Fail Clin       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.179

Review 3.  [Systematic errors in clinical studies : A comprehensive survey].

Authors:  W A Golder
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 4.  [Systematic errors in clinical studies : A comprehensive survey].

Authors:  W A Golder
Journal:  Z Rheumatol       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.372

5.  Comparison of computed tomographic angiography versus rubidium-82 positron emission tomography for the detection of patients with anatomical coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Benjamin J W Chow; Carole Dennie; Udo Hoffmann; Derek So; Robert A de Kemp; Terrence D Ruddy; Rob S Beanlands
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.223

6.  Comparison of exercise electrocardiography and stress perfusion CMR for the detection of coronary artery disease in women.

Authors:  Simon Greulich; Oliver Bruder; Michele Parker; Julia Schumm; Stefan Grün; Steffen Schneider; Igor Klem; Udo Sechtem; Heiko Mahrholdt
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-06-14       Impact factor: 5.364

Review 7.  Clinical implications of referral bias in the diagnostic performance of exercise testing for coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Joseph A Ladapo; Saul Blecker; Michael R Elashoff; Jerome J Federspiel; Dorice L Vieira; Gaurav Sharma; Mark Monane; Steven Rosenberg; Charles E Phelps; Pamela S Douglas
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2013-12-13       Impact factor: 5.501

8.  STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Jérémie F Cohen; Daniël A Korevaar; Douglas G Altman; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Lotty Hooft; Les Irwig; Deborah Levine; Johannes B Reitsma; Henrica C W de Vet; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-11-14       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Early-Onset Neonatal Sepsis: Still Room for Improvement in Procalcitonin Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.

Authors:  Claudio Chiesa; Lucia Pacifico; John F Osborn; Enea Bonci; Nora Hofer; Bernhard Resch
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.889

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.