Abstract
Clinical studies are impossible without adequate diagnostic tests, and diagnostic tests can, therefore, be considered the real basis of evidence-based medicine. In 1995 Reid et al. (1995) stated after a search of 1,302 diagnostic studies that most diagnostic tests are inadequately appraised. Efforts to improve the quality of diagnostic tests are given by initiatives like those of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standard Randomized Trials) (Anonymous xxx) movement and the STARD (Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy) (Bossuyt et al. 2003) group launching quality criteria statements for diagnostic tests in 2002 and 2003. In spite of such initiatives the evaluation of diagnostic tests prior to implementation in research programs, continues to be lacking (Morgan et al. 2007). A diagnostic test can be either qualitative, e.g., the presence of an elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate to demonstrate pneumonia, or quantitative, e.g., the ultrasound flow velocity to estimate the invasive electromagnetic flow velocity. For both qualitative and quantitative diagnostic tests three determinants of validity have been recommended by working parties:
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anonymous The quality of diagnostic tests statement, the CONSORT statement. www.consort-statement.org. Accessed 15 Dec 2011
Barnett DV (1969) Simultaneous pairwise linear structural relationships. Biometrics 28:129–142
Bland JM, Altman DG (1995) Comparing two methods of clinical measurement: a personal history. Int J Epidemiol 24:s7–s14
Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig JG, Moher D, Rennie D, De Vet HC, for the STARD steering group (2003) Education and debate. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. BMJ 326:41–44
Delong ER, Delong DM (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operated characteristic curves; a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837–845
Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under curve under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Diagn Radiol 143:29–36
Imburt-Bismut F, Messous D, Thibaut V, Myers RB, Piton A, Thabut D, Devers L, Hainque B, Mecardier A, Poynard T (2004) Intra-laboratory analytical variability of biochemical markers of fibrosis and activity and reference ranges in healthy blood donors. Clin Chem Lab Med 42:323–333
Lee J, Koh D, Ong CN (1989) Statistical evaluation of agreement between two methods for measuring a quantitative variable. Comput Biol Med 19:61–70
Morgan TM, Krumholz HM, Lifton RP, Spertus JA (2007) Nonvalidation of reported genetic risk factors for acute coronary syndrome in a large scale replication study. JAMA 297:1551–1561
Reid MC, Lachs MS, Feinstein AR (1995) Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research. Getting better but still not good. JAMA 274:645–650
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cleophas, T.J., Zwinderman, A.H. (2012). Summary of Validation Procedures for Diagnostic Tests. In: Statistics Applied to Clinical Studies. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2863-9_51
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2863-9_51
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2862-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2863-9
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)