Abstract
In order to use and interpret diagnostic tests, we need to know the operating characteristics of the test (sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios), and the prevalence of the disease. Sensitivity is the probability that a sick person tests positive, and a very sensitive test is useful when negative, to rule out the disease. Specificity is the probability of a healthy person to test negative, and a very specific test is useful when positive, to rule in the diagnosis. The positive predictive value is the probability that a person whose test is positive has the disease; the negative predictive value is the probability that a person whose test is negative is healthy. The predictive values depend on the prevalence of disease (pretest probability) so that, for the same predictive values, the probability of disease is higher in settings with a higher prevalence of disease than in those with a lower prevalence (Bayes’ rule). The likelihood ratios of a test, which may be calculated from its sensitivity and specificity, are stable for different prevalences, can deal with both dichotomous and polychotomous (multilevel) test results, and can also be used to calculate the post-test probability. For a valid diagnostic study, consider the standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy (QUADAS) criteria.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
For the evaluation of tests with an interval scale, the choice of a cut-off level and the utilization of tests with more than two levels, see Chap. 6.
- 2.
At least theoretically. In fact, the sensitivity of a test is higher at the tertiary care level because the patients have more advanced disease than in primary care.
Bibliography
Baicus C, Tanasescu C, Ionescu R (1999) Has this patient a cancer? The assessment of weight loss, anemia and erythrocyte sedimentation rate as diagnostic tests in cancer. A retrospective study based in a secondary care university hospital in Romania. Rom J Intern Med 37:261–267
Doi SA (2011) Understanding evidence in health care: using clinical epidemiology, 1st edn. Palgrave Macmillan, Sydney
Glas AS, Lijmerb JG, Prinsc MH, Bonseld GJ, Bossuyt PM (2003) The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol 56:1129–1135
Grimes DA, Schulz KF (2005) Refining clinical diagnosis with likelihood ratios. Lancet 365:1500–1505
Last JM (2001) A dictionary of epidemiology, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P (1991) Clinical epidemiology: a basic science for clinical medicine, 2nd edn. Little, Brown and Company, Boston
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Baicus, C. (2013). Using and Interpreting Diagnostic Tests with Dichotomous or Polychotomous Results. In: Doi, S., Williams, G. (eds) Methods of Clinical Epidemiology. Springer Series on Epidemiology and Public Health. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37131-8_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37131-8_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-37130-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-37131-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)