Abstract
To determine conformance with methodologic standards in the evaluation of diagnostic tests. MEDLINE database search (1992 to 1997) of nine prominent general medicine and six subspecialty journals for articles that report discriminative properties of diagnostic tests in pulmonary medicine. Articles were eligible if they reported discriminative properties of diagnostic tests in humans, diagnostic tests were intended for the detection of existing conditions, and the target disorder was relevant to pulmonary medicine. Each study was critically reviewed independently by two observers. Of the 1,029 retrieved articles, 41 met study inclusion criteria. The median number of the 12 major standards for design fulfilled by study articles was 6 (range, 1 to 12, 25th to 75th percentile, 5.0 to 8.5) and only 2 articles fulfilled all 12 standards. Seven (17%) articles did not report any standard measures of diagnostic accuracy and 7 (17%) provided data only for sensitivity and specificity. Only 4 of 17 articles (24%) that compared different tests used standard statistical methods. These results indicate that greater methodologic rigor is needed for studies that evaluate diagnostic tests in pulmonary medicine. Existing deficiencies in methodology risk the introduction of invalid tests into clinical practice.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
