The ethics of testing a test: Randomized trials of the health impact of diagnostic tests for infectious diseases

14Citations
Citations of this article
73Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In the last decade, many new rapid diagnostic tests for infectious diseases have been developed. In general, these new tests are developed with the intent to optimize feasibility and population health, not accuracy alone. However, unlike drugs or vaccines, diagnostic tests are evaluated and licensed on the basis of accuracy, not health impact (eg, reduced morbidity or mortality). Thus, these tests are sometimes recommended or scaled up for purposes of improving population health without randomized evidence that they do so. We highlight the importance of randomized trials to evaluate the health impact of novel diagnostics and note that such trials raise distinctive ethical challenges of equipoise, equity, and informed consent. We discuss the distinction between equipoise for patient-important outcomes versus diagnostic accuracy, the equity implications of evaluating health impact of diagnostics under routine conditions, and the importance of offering reasonable choices for informed consent in diagnostic trials. © 2012 The Author.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dowdy, D. W., Gounder, C. R., Corbett, E. L., Ngwira, L. G., Chaisson, R. E., & Merritt, M. W. (2012). The ethics of testing a test: Randomized trials of the health impact of diagnostic tests for infectious diseases. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 55(11), 1522–1526. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cis736

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free