European Journal of Epidemiology

, Volume 28, Issue 9, pp 711–712 | Cite as

Meta-analysis of diagnostic performance studies

  • M. G. Myriam Hunink

When a busy clinician needs to search the literature to address a question, (s)he is commonly faced with the insurmountable task of ploughing through the ever-increasing number of scientific publications. Systematic reviews provide a quick and easy way for such a physician to answer questions in an efficient manner. Systematic reviews summarize and combine the published literature on a particular topic and are considered the top level on the evidence hierarchy. If the summarized data permits, results from the individual studies are combined in a meta-analysis which provides a quantitative pooled result. Such a pooled result is useful both in-of-itself and for comparative (cost-)effectiveness research using decision modeling. Such exercises are extremely useful given current prolific publication, both for the busy clinican and for the comparative (cost-)effectiveness researcher.

Inspite of the advantages of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, there are limitations of such analyses...


Diagnostic Accuracy Diagnostic Performance Pool Result Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis Severe Coronary Artery Disease 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Parker LA, Gomez Saez N, Porta M, Hernandez-Aguado I, Lumbreras B. The impact of including different study designs in meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies. Eur J Epidemiol. 2013. Published online 2012 doi: 10.1007/s10654-012-9756-9.
  2. 2.
    Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heistekamp S, Bonsel GJ, Prins MH, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA. 1999;282:1061–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rutjes AWS, Reitsma JB, Di Nisio M, Smidt N, van Rijn JC, Bossuyt PMM. Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies. CMAJ. 2006;176:469–76.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Erasmus University Medical Center RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Harvard School of Public HealthBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations