• JAMA · Oct 2004

    Review

    Accuracy of diagnostic tests read with and without clinical information: a systematic review.

    • Clement T Loy and Les Irwig.
    • Screening and Test Evaluation Program, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
    • JAMA. 2004 Oct 6; 292 (13): 1602-9.

    ContextAlthough it is common practice to read tests with clinical information, whether this improves or decreases the accuracy of test reading is uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine whether diagnostic tests are more accurate when read with clinical information or without it.Data SourcesMEDLINE search (1966-December 2003) extended by search of reference lists and articles citing the articles retrieved (Web of Science, 1985-December 2003).Study SelectionAll articles comparing the accuracy of tests read twice by the same readers, once without and once with clinical information, but otherwise under identical conditions. Only articles that reported sensitivity and specificity or receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were included.Data ExtractionData were extracted by one author and reviewed independently by the other. When the data were difficult to interpret, differences were resolved by discussion.Data SynthesisSixteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Eleven articles compared areas under ROC curves for tests read with and without clinical information, and 5 compared only sensitivity and specificity. Ten articles used actual clinical information; 6 used constructed clinical information that was plausible. Overall, clinical information improved test reading accuracy although the effect was smaller in the articles using actual clinical information when compared with those using constructed clinical information. There were no instances in which clinical information resulted in significant reduction in test reading accuracy. In some instances, improved test reading accuracy came from improved sensitivity without loss of specificity.ConclusionsAt least for the tests examined, the common practice of reading diagnostic tests with clinical information seems justified. Future studies should be designed to investigate the best way of providing clinical information. These studies should also give an estimate of the accuracy of clinical information used, display ROC curves with identified data points, and include a wider range of diagnostic tests.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.