Diagnostic test accuracy may vary with prevalence: implications for evidence-based diagnosis

被引:338
作者
Leeflang, Mariska M. G. [1 ]
Bossuyt, Patrick M. M. [1 ]
Irwig, Les [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol Biostat & Bioinformat, NL-1100 DE Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Sydney, Sch Publ Hlth, Screening & Test Evaluat Program, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
关键词
Sensitivity and specificity; Diagnostic test accuracy; Prevalence; Bayes' theorem; Evidence-based diagnosis; spectrum bias; CORONARY-ARTERY DISEASE; SPECTRUM BIAS; MULTIPLE-SCLEROSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS; SUBGROUP VARIATION; LIKELIHOOD RATIOS; EVOKED-POTENTIALS; SCREENING TEST; SPECIFICITY; SENSITIVITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.04.007
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Several studies and systematic reviews have reported results that indicate that sensitivity and specificity may vary with prevalence. Study Design and Setting: we identify and explore mechanisms that may be responsible for sensitivity and specificity varying with prevalence and illustrate them with examples from the literature. Results: Clinical and artefactual variability may be responsible for changes in prevalence and accompanying changes in sensitivity and specificity. Clinical variability refers to differences in the clinical situation that may cause sensitivity and specificity to vary with prevalence. For example, a patient population with a higher disease prevalence may include more severely diseased patients, therefore, the test performs better in this population. Artefactual variability refers to effects on prevalence and accuracy associated with study design, for example, the verification of index test results by a reference standard. Changes in prevalence influence the extent of overestimation due to imperfect reference standard classification. Conclusions: Sensitivity and specificity may vary in different clinical populations, and prevalence is a marker for such differences. Clinicians are advised to base their decisions on studies that most closely match their own clinical situation, using prevalence to guide the detection of differences in study population or study design. (c) 2008 Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 12
页数:8
相关论文
共 40 条
[21]   MAGNETIC-RESONANCE-IMAGING OF THE HEAD IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF MULTIPLE-SCLEROSIS - A PROSPECTIVE 2-YEAR FOLLOW-UP WITH COMPARISON OF CLINICAL-EVALUATION, EVOKED-POTENTIALS, OLIGOCLONAL BANDING, AND CT [J].
LEE, KH ;
HASHIMOTO, SA ;
HOOGE, JP ;
KASTRUKOFF, LF ;
OGER, JJF ;
LI, DKB ;
PATY, DW .
NEUROLOGY, 1991, 41 (05) :657-660
[22]   Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests [J].
Lijmer, JG ;
Mol, BW ;
Heisterkamp, S ;
Bonsel, GJ ;
Prins, MH ;
van der Meulen, JHP ;
Bossuyt, PMM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1999, 282 (11) :1061-1066
[23]   The effects of study design and spectrum bias on the evaluation of diagnostic accuracy of confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy in glaucoma [J].
Medeiros, Felipe A. ;
Ng, Diana ;
Zangwill, Linda M. ;
Sample, Pamela A. ;
Bowd, Christopher ;
Weinreb, Robert N. .
INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2007, 48 (01) :214-222
[24]   Bias in discrepant analysis: When two wrongs don't make a right [J].
Miller, WC .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1998, 51 (03) :219-231
[25]   Effect of study design on the association between nuchal translucency measurement and Down syndrome [J].
Mol, BWJ ;
Lijmer, JG ;
van der Meulen, J ;
Pajkrt, E ;
Bilardo, CM ;
Bossuyt, PMM .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1999, 94 (05) :864-869
[26]   Limitations of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio, and Bayes' theorem in assessing diagnostic probabilities: A clinical example [J].
Moons, KGM ;
vanEs, GA ;
Deckers, JW ;
Habbema, JDF ;
Grobbee, DE .
EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1997, 8 (01) :12-17
[27]   Spectrum bias or spectrum effect? Subgroup variation in diagnostic test evaluation [J].
Mulherin, SA ;
Miller, WC .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2002, 137 (07) :598-602
[28]   The effect of spectrum bias on the utility of magnetic resonance imaging and evoked potentials in the diagnosis of suspected multiple sclerosis [J].
OConnor, PW ;
Tansey, CM ;
Detsky, AS ;
Mushlin, AI ;
Kucharczyk, W .
NEUROLOGY, 1996, 47 (01) :140-144
[29]   Ultrasonography and limited computed tomography in the diagnosis and management of appendicitis in children [J].
Peña, BMG ;
Mandl, KD ;
Kraus, SJ ;
Fischer, AC ;
Fleisher, GR ;
Lund, DP ;
Taylor, GA .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1999, 282 (11) :1041-1046
[30]  
Perera Raphael, 2007, ACP J Club, V146, pA8