What nephrologists need to know about diagnostic test accuracy articles.
Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials are well-recognized as the best evidence for an intervention and are also becoming more available for diagnostic test evaluation. In the absence of a well-conducted and well-reported systematic review clinicians must rely on primary studies to determine how best to interpret and understand diagnostic test information. Diagnostic test studies are abundant in the published literature; however, there are considerable limitations to the information provided in many of these papers and careful appraisal is required before the findings can be applied to individual patients. The current paper provides a framework for determining bias, clinical applicability and erroneous findings within a paper, allowing greater efficiency in selecting studies and deciding on the value of the information reported in them.
Williams
Gabrielle J
GJ
Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, New South Wales, Australia. gabriew4@chw.edu.au
Craig
Jonathan C
JC
D000328:Adult; D015982:Bias; D003955:Diagnostic Tests, Routine; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006801:Humans; D006978:Hypertension, Renovascular / Q000209:etiology; D008297:Male; D009398:Nephrology; D015588:Observer Variation; D018579:Patient Selection; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D012078:Renal Artery Obstruction / Q000150:complications / Q000175:diagnosis*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results