Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions

Abstract Background While most relevant clinical questions are comparative, most diagnostic test accuracy studies focus on the accuracy of only one test. If we combine these single-test evaluations in a systematic review that aims to compare the accuracy of two or more tests to indicate the most acc...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mariska M. G. Leeflang, Johannes B. Reitsma
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2018-09-01
Series:Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41512-018-0039-0
id doaj-6c660efeb8d44ce4805b9b586d75aced
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6c660efeb8d44ce4805b9b586d75aced2020-11-24T21:27:41ZengBMCDiagnostic and Prognostic Research2397-75232018-09-01211310.1186/s41512-018-0039-0Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questionsMariska M. G. Leeflang0Johannes B. Reitsma1Department Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam UMC, University of AmsterdamJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center UtrechtAbstract Background While most relevant clinical questions are comparative, most diagnostic test accuracy studies focus on the accuracy of only one test. If we combine these single-test evaluations in a systematic review that aims to compare the accuracy of two or more tests to indicate the most accurate one, the resulting comparative accuracy estimates may be biased. Methods and results Systematic reviews comparing the accuracy of two tests should only include studies that evaluate both tests in the same patients and against the same reference standard. However, these studies are not always available. And even if available, they may still be biased. For example because they included a specific patient group that would not have been tested with two or more tests in actual practice. Combining comparative and non-comparative studies in a comparative accuracy meta-analysis requires novel statistical approaches. Conclusion In order to improve decision-making about the use of test in practice, better designed and reported primary diagnostic studies are needed. Meta-analytic and network-type approaches available for therapeutic questions need to be extended to comparative diagnostic accuracy questions.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41512-018-0039-0Meta-analysisSystematic reviewsDiagnostic test accuracyComparative accuracy
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mariska M. G. Leeflang
Johannes B. Reitsma
spellingShingle Mariska M. G. Leeflang
Johannes B. Reitsma
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions
Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
Meta-analysis
Systematic reviews
Diagnostic test accuracy
Comparative accuracy
author_facet Mariska M. G. Leeflang
Johannes B. Reitsma
author_sort Mariska M. G. Leeflang
title Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions
title_short Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions
title_full Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions
title_fullStr Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions
title_full_unstemmed Systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions
title_sort systematic reviews and meta-analyses addressing comparative test accuracy questions
publisher BMC
series Diagnostic and Prognostic Research
issn 2397-7523
publishDate 2018-09-01
description Abstract Background While most relevant clinical questions are comparative, most diagnostic test accuracy studies focus on the accuracy of only one test. If we combine these single-test evaluations in a systematic review that aims to compare the accuracy of two or more tests to indicate the most accurate one, the resulting comparative accuracy estimates may be biased. Methods and results Systematic reviews comparing the accuracy of two tests should only include studies that evaluate both tests in the same patients and against the same reference standard. However, these studies are not always available. And even if available, they may still be biased. For example because they included a specific patient group that would not have been tested with two or more tests in actual practice. Combining comparative and non-comparative studies in a comparative accuracy meta-analysis requires novel statistical approaches. Conclusion In order to improve decision-making about the use of test in practice, better designed and reported primary diagnostic studies are needed. Meta-analytic and network-type approaches available for therapeutic questions need to be extended to comparative diagnostic accuracy questions.
topic Meta-analysis
Systematic reviews
Diagnostic test accuracy
Comparative accuracy
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41512-018-0039-0
work_keys_str_mv AT mariskamgleeflang systematicreviewsandmetaanalysesaddressingcomparativetestaccuracyquestions
AT johannesbreitsma systematicreviewsandmetaanalysesaddressingcomparativetestaccuracyquestions
_version_ 1725973988089266176