DHINI AIYULIE NOVRI- EBM DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY
DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY
STUDIES
Are the results of the study valid?
Was the diagnostic test evaluated in a Representative spectrum of
patients (like those in whom it would be used in practice)?
What is best? Where do I find the information?
It is ideal if the diagnostic test is applied to the full The Methods section should tell you how patients
spectrum of patients - those with mild, severe, were enrolled and whether they were randomly
early and late cases of the target disorder. It is also selected or consecutive admissions. It should also
best if the patients are randomly selected or con- tell you where patients came from and whether
secutive admissions so that selection bias is mini- they are likely to be representative of the patients
mized. in whom the test is to be used.
In this paper
Yes No Unclear
It was applied to the full spectrum of patients. Each 50 patients with normotensive,
Comment:
preeclamptic, and severe preeclamptic. They were selected randomly with min. bias.
Was the reference standard applied regardless of the index test
result?
What is best? Where do I find the information?
Ideally both the index test and the reference The Methods section should indicate whether or
standard should be carried out on all patients in not the reference standard was applied to all pa-
the study. In some situations where the reference tients or if an alternative reference standard (eg
standard is invasive or expensive there may be res- follow-up) was applied to those who tested nega-
ervations about subjecting patients with a nega- tive on the index test.
tive index test result (and thus a low probability of
disease) to the reference standard. An alternative
reference standard is to follow-up people for an
appropriate period of time (dependent on disease
in question) to see if they are truly negative.
In this paper
Yes No Unclear
The standard is global standard for diagnosing a preeclampsia.
Comment: new onset of hypertension and proteinuria or hypertension and end-organ dysfunction with or
without proteinuria after 20 weeks of gestation in a previously normotensive woman
Was there an independent, blind comparison between the index test
and an appropriate reference (‘gold’) standard of diagnosis?
What is best? Where do I find the information?
There are two issues here. First, the reference The Methods section should have a description of
standard should be appropriate - as close to the the reference standard used and if you are unsure
‘truth’ as possible. Sometimes there may not be a of whether or not this is an appropriate reference
single reference test that is suitable and a combi- standard you may need to do some background
nation of tests may be used to indicate the pres- searching in the area.
ence of disease. The Methods section should also describe who
Second, the reference standard and the index test conducted the two tests and whether each was
being assessed should be applied to each patient conducted independently and blinded to the results
independently and blindly. Those who interpreted of the other.
the results of one test should not be aware of the
results of the other test.
In this paper
Yes No Unclear
They already knew from the start whether these patients normotensive or not.
Comment: Conducted indepently and blinded or not was not described in the journal.
What were the results?
Are test charecteristics presented?
There are two types of results commonly reported in diagnostic test studies. One concerns the accuracy
of the test and is reflected in the sensitivity and specificity. The other concerns how the test performs in
the population being tested and is reflected in predictive values (also called post-test probabilities). To ex-
plore the meaning of these terms, consider a study in which 1000 elderly people with suspected dementia
undergo an index test and a reference standard. The prevalence of dementia in this group is 25%. 240
people tested positive on both the index test and the reference standard and 600 people tested nega-
tive on both tests. The first step is to draw a 2 x 2 table as shown below. We are told that the prevalence
of dementia is 25% therefore we can fill in the last row of totals - 25% of 1000 people is 250 - so 250
people will have dementia and 750 will be free of dementia. We also know the number of people testing
positive and negative on both tests and so we can fill in two more cells of the table.
Reference standard
+ve -ve
Index test +ve 240
-ve 600
250 750 1000
By subtraction we can easily complete the table:
Reference standard
+ve -ve
Index test +ve 240 150 390
-ve 10 600 620
250 750 1000
Now we are ready to calculate the various measures.
What is the measure? What does it mean?
Sensitivity (Sn) = the proportion of people with The sensitivity tells us how well the test identifies
the condition who have a positive test result. people with the condition. A highly sensitive test
will not miss many people.
In our example the Sn = 240/250 = 0.96 10 people (4%) with dementia were falsely iden-
Preeclamptic : 0,7 tified as not having it. This means the test is fairly
Severe preeclamptic : 0,58 good at identifying people with the condition.
Specificity (Sp) = the proportion of people with- The specificity tells us how well the test identifies
out the condition who have a negative test result. people without the condition. A highly specific test
will not falsely identify many people as having the
condition.
In our example the Sp = 600/750 = 0.80 150 people (20%) without dementia were falsely
identified as having it. This means the test is only
Preeclamptic : 0,68
moderately good at identifying people without the
Severe preeclamptic 0,7
condition.
Positive Predictive Value (PPV) = the proportion This measure tells us how well the test performs in
of people with a positive test who have the condi- this population. It is dependent on the accuracy of
tion. the test (primarily specificity) and the prevalence
of the condition.
In our example the PPV = 240/390 = 0.62 Of the 390 people who had a positive test result,
62% will actually have dementia.
PPV for preeclampsia = 0,68
PPV for severe preeclampsia = 0.65
Negative Predictive Value (NPV) = the propor- This measure tells us how well the test performs in
tion of people with a negative test who do not have this population. It is dependent on the accuracy of
the condition. the test and the prevalence of the condition.
In our example the NPV = 600/610 = 0.98 Of the 610 people with a -ve test , 98% will not
NPV for preeclampsia = 0.69. Severe = 0.625 have dementia.
Applicability of the results
Were the methods for performing the test described in sufficient
detail to permit replication?
What is best? Where do I find the information?
The article should have sufficient description of The Methods section should describe the test in
the test to allow its replication and also detail.
interpretation of the results.
In this paper
Yes No Unclear
Comment: it was easy and allowed for replication and interpretation was pretty easy too.
Demikian tugas saya dokter, terimakasih banyak
DHINI AIYULIE NOVRI
PPDS OBGYN UNRI
DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY
STUDIES
