Advertisement

Designing Diagnostic Studies

  • Amir Momeni
  • Matthew Pincus
  • Jenny Libien
Chapter

Abstract

Research and investigation are important components of the practice of pathology. Pathologists are mainly involved in two types of clinical research: diagnostic or prognostic. Diagnostic research is conducted to improve diagnostic procedures and tests with the aim of improving diagnostic accuracy. Prognostic research mainly aims to identify and quantify factors that dictate the prognosis in patients.

References

  1. 1.
    di Ruffano LF, Hyde CJ, McCaffery KJ, Bossuyt PM, Deeks JJ. Assessing the value of diagnostic tests: a framework for designing and evaluating trials. BMJ. 2012;344:e686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thompson M, Van den Bruel A. Diagnostic Tests Toolkit. Chichester: Wiley; 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glasser SP. Research methodology for studies of diagnostic tests. In: Essentials of clinical research. Springer International Publishing: Netherlands; 2014. pp 313–26.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bossuyt PM, Irwig L, Craig J, Glasziou P. Diagnosis: comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. Br Med J. 2006;6:1089–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Meier K. Statistical guidance on reporting results from studies evaluating diagnostic tests. Comment. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration: USA; 2007.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jinyuan LI, Wan TA, Guanqin CH, Yin LU, Changyong FE. Correlation and agreement: overview and clarification of competing concepts and measures. Shanghai Arc Psychiatry. 2016;28(2):115.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cardoso JR, Pereira LM, Iversen MD, Ramos AL. What is gold standard and what is ground truth? Dental Press J Orthod. 2014;19(5):27–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hawkins DM, Garrett JA, Stephenson B. Some issues in resolution of diagnostic tests using an imperfect gold standard. Stat Med. 2001;20(13):1987–2001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chang SM, Matchar DB, Smetana GW, Umscheid CA. Methods guide for medical test reviews. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality: Rockville; 2012.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Vandenbroucke JP, Glas AS, Bossuyt PM. Case–control and two-gate designs in diagnostic accuracy studies. Clin Chem. 2005;51(8):1335–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Simel DL, Samsa GP, Matchar DB. Likelihood ratios with confidence: sample size estimation for diagnostic test studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(8):763–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, Lijmer JG, Moher D, Rennie D, De Vet HC. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003;41(1):68–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amir Momeni
    • 1
  • Matthew Pincus
    • 1
  • Jenny Libien
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PathologyState University of New York, Downstate Medical CenterBrooklynUSA

Personalised recommendations