www.cebm.net evidence based health care course paris, 2010 appraising diagnostic studies dr matthew...
TRANSCRIPT
www.cebm.net
Evidence Based Health Care CourseParis, 2010
Appraising diagnostic studies
Dr Matthew ThompsonSenior Clinical Scientist
www.cebm.net
What is diagnosis?
• Increase certainty about presence/absence of disease
• Disease severity• Monitor clinical course• Assess prognosis – risk/stage• Plan treatment e.g., location • Stall for time!
www.cebm.net• 2/3 malpractice claims against GPs in UK
• 40,000-80,000 US hospital deaths from misdiagnosis per year
• Adverse events, negligence cases, serious disability more likely to be related to misdiagnosis than drug errors
• Diagnosis uses <5% of hospital costs, but influences 60% of decision making
www.cebm.net
Series of patientsSeries of patients
Index testIndex test
Reference (“gold”) standardReference (“gold”) standard
Compare the results of the Compare the results of the index test with the reference index test with the reference
standard, blindedstandard, blinded
Basic structure of diagnostic studiesBasic structure of diagnostic studies
www.cebm.net
Appraising diagnostic tests: 3 easy steps
1. Are the results valid?
2. What are the results?
3. Will they help me look after my patients?
•Appropriate spectrum of patients?
•Does everyone get the gold standard?
•Is there an independent, blind or objective comparison with the gold standard?
•Sensitivity, specificity
•Likelihood ratios
•Predictive values
•Can I do the test in my setting?•Do results apply to the mix of patients I see?•Will the result change my management?•Costs to patient/health service?
www.cebm.netAppropriate spectrum of patients?
• Ideally, test should be performed on group of patients in whom it will be applied in the real world clinical setting
• Spectrum bias = study uses only highly selected patients…….perhaps those in whom you would really suspect have the diagnosis
www.cebm.netAll patients have the gold standard?
• Ideally all patients get the gold /reference standard test
• Work-up bias = only some patients get the gold standard…..perhaps the ones in whom you really suspect have the disease
www.cebm.net
• Ideally, the gold standard is independent, blind and objective
• Observer bias = test is very subjective, or done by person who knows something about the patient
Independent, blind or objective comparison with the gold standard?
2 by 2 table
Disease
Test
+ -
+
-
True positives
False negatives
True negatives
False positives
2 by 2 table: sensitivity
Disease
Test
+ -
+
-
Sensitivity = a / a + c
Proportion of people with the disease who have a positive test result.
a
True positives
c
False negatives
2 by 2 table: specificity
Disease
Test
+ -
+
-
b
False positives
d
True negatives
Specificity = d / b + d
Proportion of people without the disease who have a negative test result.
2 x 2 table: positive predictive value
Disease
Test
+ -
+
- c
a b
d
PPV = a / a + b
Proportion of people with a positive test who have the disease
2 x 2 table: negative predictive value
Disease
Test
+ -
+
- c
a b
d
NPV = d / c + d
Proportion of people with a negative test who do not have the disease
Likelihood ratios
Positive likelihood ratio (LR+)
How much more likely is a positive test to be found in a person with the disease than in a person without it?
LR+ = sens/(1-spec)
Negative likelihood ratio (LR-)
How much more likely is a negative test to be found in a person without the condition than in a person with it?
LR- = (1-sens)/(spec)
2 x 2 table: positive likelihood ratio
Disease
Test
+ -
+
- c
a b
d
LR+ = a/a+c / b/b+d
or
LR+ = sens/(1-spec)
How much more often a positive test occurs in people with compared to those without the disease
2 x 2 table: negative likelihood ratio
Disease
Test
+ -
+
- c
a b
d
LR- = c/a+c / d/b+d
or
LR- = (1-sens)/(spec)
How less likely a negative test result is in people with the disease compared to those without the disease
What do likelihood ratios mean?
LR>10 = strong positive test result
LR<0.1 = strong negative test result
LR=1
No diagnostic value
Will the test apply in my setting?
Reproducibility of the test and interpretation in my setting
Do results apply to the mix of patients I see? Will the results change my management? Impact on outcomes that are important to patients? Where does the test fit into the diagnostic strategy? Costs to patient/health service?
Refinement of the diagnostic
causes
•Restricted Rule Outs•Stepwise refinement•Probabilistic reasoning•Pattern recognition fit•Clinical Prediction Rule
Spot diagnosesSelf-labelling Presenting complaintPattern recognition
Initiation of the diagnosis
Defining the final diagnosis
Known DiagnosisFurther tests orderedTest of treatmentTest of timeNo label
How do clinicians make diagnoses? Diagnostic stages & strategies (Heneghan et al, BMJ 2009)
Stage Strategies used
Evaluating the roles of new tests
Replacement – new replaces old E.g., CT colonography for barium enema
Triage – new determines need for old E.g., B-natriuretic peptide for echocardiography
Add-on – new combined with old ECG and myocardial perfusion scan
Bossuyt et al BMJ 2006;332:1089–92
Stepwise evaluation of new diagnostic tests. Van den Bruel A, J Clin Epidemiol 2007. Bossuyt P, BMJ 2006
www.cebm.net
What’s next?What’s next?• In your small groups, pick a diagnostic article• Rapidly appraise it using the 3 steps• Explain sensitivity/specificity etc
THANK YOU!