Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions

Abstract

While most relevant clinical questions are comparative, most diagnostic test accuracy studies focus on the accuracy of only one test. If we combine these single-test evaluations in a systematic review that aims to compare the accuracy of two or more tests to indicate the most accurate one, the resulting comparative accuracy estimates may be biased. Systematic reviews comparing the accuracy of two tests should only include studies that evaluate both tests in the same patients and against the same reference standard. However, these studies are not always available. And even if available, they may still be biased. For example because they included a specific patient group that would not have been tested with two or more tests in actual practice. Combining comparative and non-comparative studies in a comparative accuracy meta-analysis requires novel statistical approaches. In order to improve decision-making about the use of test in practice, better designed and reported primary diagnostic studies are needed. Meta-analytic and network-type approaches available for therapeutic questions need to be extended to comparative diagnostic accuracy questions.