Skip to main content

Critical Appraisal of Diagnostic Studies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Introduction to Statistical Methods in Pathology

Abstract

It has been shown that diagnosis utilizes approximately 5% of healthcare costs, yet 60% of the clinical decision-making process is dependent on the diagnosis. Since approximately 40,000–80,000 hospital deaths per year in the United States are attributed to misdiagnosis, reduction of misdiagnosis is now being recognized as a major goal in patient safety efforts. Many of these deaths are preventable deaths that can be avoided if a correct and timely diagnosis is made. Pathology and laboratory medicine in their major roles as a source of diagnosis or a major contributor to the diagnostic process require a push toward more accurate and precise testing and diagnosis, and this requires integrating the best available evidence into the everyday practice of pathology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Wang F, et al. Hierarchical models for ROC curve summary measures: Design and analysis of multi‐reader, multi‐modality studies of medical tests. Stat Med. 2008;27(2):243–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mallett S, Halligan S, Thompson M, Collins GS, Altman DG. Interpreting diagnostic accuracy studies for patient care. BMJ. 2012;345(jul021):e3999.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim KW, Lee J, Choi SH, Huh J, Park SH. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating diagnostic test accuracy: a practical review for clinical researchers-part I. General guidance and tips. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16(6):1175.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Whiting PF. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):529.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Leeflang MMG. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(12):889.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. van Rhee H, Suurmond R, Hak T. User manual for Meta-Essentials: Workbooks for meta-analyses (Version 1.0).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ghersi D, Berlin J, Askie L. Cochrane prospective meta-analysis Methods Group. COCHRANE METHODS 2011;35.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Campbell JM, Klugar M, Ding S, Carmody DP, Hakonsen SJ, Jadotte YT, White S, Munn Z. Diagnostic test accuracy. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):154–62

    Google Scholar 

  9. Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):629–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee J, Kim KW, Choi SH, Huh J, Park SH. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating diagnostic test accuracy: a practical review for clinical researchers-Part II. statistical methods of meta-analysis. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16(6):1188.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Momeni, A., Pincus, M., Libien, J. (2018). Critical Appraisal of Diagnostic Studies. In: Introduction to Statistical Methods in Pathology . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60543-2_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60543-2_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60542-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60543-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics