Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy

被引:240
作者
Leeflang, M. M. G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, NL-1100 DE Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
diagnosis; diagnostic test accuracy; evidence-based medicine; meta-analyses; sensitivity and specificity; systematic reviews; EMPIRICAL-EVIDENCE; LIKELIHOOD RATIOS; BIAS; TUBERCULOSIS; SPECIFICITY; SENSITIVITY; INFECTION; DISEASE; PCR; PUBLICATION;
D O I
10.1111/1469-0691.12474
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100201 [内科学];
摘要
Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy summarize the accuracy, e.g. the sensitivity and specificity, of diagnostic tests in a systematic and transparent way. The aim of such a review is to investigate whether a test is sufficiently specific or sensitive to fit its role in practice, to compare the accuracy of two or more diagnostic tests, or to investigate where existing variation in results comes from. The search strategy should be broad and preferably fully reported, to enable readers to assess the completeness of it. Included studies usually have a cross-sectional design in which the tests of interest, ideally both the index test and its comparator, are evaluated against the reference standard. They should be a reflection of the situation that the review question refers to. The quality of included studies is assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 checklist, containing items such as a consecutive and all-inclusive patient selection process, blinding of index test and reference standard assessment, a valid reference standard, and complete verification of all included participants. Studies recruiting cases separately from (healthy) controls are regarded as bearing a high risk of bias. For meta-analysis, the bivariate model or the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model is used. These models take into account potential threshold effects and the correlation between sensitivity and specificity. They also allow addition of covariates for investigatation of potential sources of heterogeneity. Finally, the results from the meta-analyses should be explained and interpreted for the reader, to be well understood.
引用
收藏
页码:105 / 113
页数:9
相关论文
共 48 条
[1]
Beynon R, 2013, COCHRANE DATABASE SY, V9
[2]
Diagnosis - Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways [J].
Bossuyt, PM ;
Irwig, L ;
Craig, J ;
Glasziou, P .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2006, 332 (7549) :1089-1092
[3]
No evidence of bias in the process of publication of diagnostic accuracy studies in stroke submitted as abstracts [J].
Brazzelli, Miriam ;
Lewis, Stephanie C. ;
Deeks, Jonathan J. ;
Sandercock, Peter A. G. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 62 (04) :425-430
[4]
Brenner H, 1997, STAT MED, V16, P981, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19970515)16:9<981::AID-SIM510>3.0.CO
[5]
2-N
[6]
Pyrazinamide Susceptibility Testing in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a Systematic Review with Meta-Analyses [J].
Chang, Kwok Chiu ;
Yew, Wing Wai ;
Zhang, Ying .
ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY, 2011, 55 (10) :4499-4505
[7]
Chen J, 2011, PLOS ONE, V6
[8]
The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed [J].
Deeks, JJ ;
Macaskill, P ;
Irwig, L .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (09) :882-893
[9]
Diagnostic Accuracy of Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction in Detection of Clostridium difficile in the Stool Samples of Patients With Suspected Clostridium difficile Infection: A Meta-Analysis [J].
Deshpande, Abhishek ;
Pasupuleti, Vinay ;
Rolston, David D. K. ;
Jain, Anil ;
Deshpande, Narayan ;
Pant, Chaitanya ;
Hernandez, Adrian V. .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2011, 53 (07) :E81-E90
[10]
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Antigen Detection Tests for the Diagnosis of Tuberculosis [J].
Flores, L. L. ;
Steingart, K. R. ;
Dendukuri, N. ;
Schiller, I. ;
Minion, J. ;
Pai, M. ;
Ramsay, A. ;
Henry, M. ;
Laal, S. .
CLINICAL AND VACCINE IMMUNOLOGY, 2011, 18 (10) :1616-1627