Why we need better test evaluations.

48Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

A laboratory test is clinically useful only if it successfully answers a question of consequence to patient management. Unfortunately, the results and conclusions of many published test evaluations are misleading or of uncertain validity because common-sense principles of study design are overlooked. This is illustrated by examples from recent literature. We suggest that tests should be evaluated with prospective studies of patients representative of the population for which the test will ultimately be used. The clinical question to be addressed by the test should be clearly stated, and then answered for each patient by means independent of the test being evaluated. When comparing tests with each other, decision levels should be chosen to give either the same sensitivity or specificity for each. The use of soundly designed protocols for the clinical evaluation of tests provides the information needed to select the most effective tests.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zweig, M. H., & Robertson, E. A. (1982). Why we need better test evaluations. Clinical Chemistry, 28(6), 1272–1276. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/28.6.1272

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