Advertisement

Conclusion

  • Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai
Chapter

Abstract

Clinical diagnosis rests on the integration of complex sets of information, from disease prevalence to patient history, clinical signs, and ancillary tests, finally pivoting on the chosen diagnostic test. While the goal of accurate diagnosis is eventually improving clinical outcomes while leading to appropriately use of the available resources, this is often challenging or redundant. Accordingly, diagnostic accuracy rests on the comparison between the index test and one or more references tests, across several dimensions of accuracy which include but are not limited to sensitivity and specificity. Adding complexity, in the era of globalized healthcare and electronic health records, it is impossible or naïve to rest decision-making on a single clinical study, even if large and valid. Only the credible synthesis of several multiple studies in a systematic review can thus confirm accuracy and internal validity while boosting external validity and appraising moderators. Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies aims exactly at this. By pooling several different studies sharing some common content, scope, and validity features, it can prove as a useful tool for clinical synthesis and evidence-based practice. Knowledge of the subtleties involved in its design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and application of meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies is required for all careful researchers and practitioners aiming to exploit rather than be dominated by the information era in the clinical and scholarly realm.

Keywords

Accuracy Diagnosis Evidence-based medicine Meta-analysis Systematic review 

Notes

Funding/Disclosure

None

References

  1. 1.
    Guyatt GH, Mills EJ, Elbourne D. In the era of systematic reviews, does the size of an individual trial still matter. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Biondi-Zoccai G, editor. Network meta-analysis: evidence synthesis with mixed treatment comparison. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers; 2014.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Biondi-Zoccai G, editor. Umbrella reviews. Evidence synthesis with overviews of reviews and meta-epidemiologic studies. Springer International: Cham; 2016.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gatsonis C, Paliwal P. Meta-analysis of diagnostic and screening test accuracy evaluations: methodologic primer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:271–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biondi-Zoccai GG, Agostoni P, Abbate A. Parallel hierarchy of scientific studies in cardiovascular medicine. Ital Heart J. 2003;4:819–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medico-Surgical Sciences and BiotechnologiesSapienza University of RomeLatinaItaly
  2. 2.Department of AngioCardioNeurologyIRCCS NeuromedPozzilliItaly

Personalised recommendations