Evaluating diagnostic tests with imperfect standards.

New diagnostic tests frequently are evaluated against gold standards that are assumed to classify patients with unerring accuracy according to the presence or absence of disease. In practice, gold standards rarely are perfect predictors of disease and tend to misclassify a small number of patients. When an imperfect standard is used to evaluate a diagnostic test, many commonly used measures of test performance are distorted. It is not widely appreciated that these distortions occur in predictable directions and that they may be of considerable magnitude, even when the gold standard has a high degree of accuracy. The diagnostic powers of clinical tests will be more accurately reported if consideration is given to the types of biases that result from the use of imperfect standards. Several different approaches may be used to minimize these distortions when evaluating new tests.

[1]  M. Sherman,et al.  Evaluation of a latex agglutination test for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated colitis. , 1988, American journal of clinical pathology.

[2]  S D Walter,et al.  Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: a review. , 1988, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[3]  C B Begg,et al.  Biases in the assessment of diagnostic tests. , 1987, Statistics in medicine.

[4]  L. Peterson,et al.  Detection of Clostridium difficile toxins A (enterotoxin) and B (cytotoxin) in clinical specimens. Evaluation of a latex agglutination test. , 1986, American journal of clinical pathology.

[5]  J. Kellogg,et al.  Detection of group A streptococci in the laboratory or physician's office. Culture vs antibody methods. , 1986, JAMA.

[6]  S. L. Miller,et al.  Identification of chlamydia in cervical smears by immunofluorescence: technic, sensitivity, and specificity. , 1986, American journal of clinical pathology.

[7]  J. Schachter,et al.  Comparison of monoclonal antibody staining and culture in diagnosing cervical chlamydial infection , 1986, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[8]  P. Coudron,et al.  Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in genital specimens by the Microtrak direct specimen test. , 1986, American journal of clinical pathology.

[9]  P M Vacek,et al.  The effect of conditional dependence on the evaluation of diagnostic tests. , 1985, Biometrics.

[10]  E. Caul,et al.  Evaluation of a genus reactive monoclonal antibody in rapid identification of Chlamydia trachomatis by direct immunofluorescence. , 1985, Genitourinary medicine.

[11]  S. Sheps,et al.  The assessment of diagnostic tests. A survey of current medical research. , 1984, JAMA.

[12]  T. Quinn,et al.  Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections by direct immunofluorescence staining of genital secretions. A multicenter trial. , 1984, Annals of internal medicine.

[13]  K. Shunk,et al.  Rapid diagnosis of chlamydial infections with the MicroTrak direct test , 1984, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[14]  C. Pai,et al.  Latex agglutination test for detection of Clostridium difficile toxin in stool samples , 1984, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[15]  J. J. Redys,et al.  Evaluation of aerobic and anaerobic methods for recovery of streptococci from throat cultures. , 1984, The Journal of pediatrics.

[16]  K. Holmes,et al.  Culture-independent diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis using monoclonal antibodies. , 1984, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  W. Stamm,et al.  Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis inclusions in Mccoy cell cultures with fluorescein-conjugated monoclonal antibodies , 1983, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[18]  K. Holmes,et al.  Diagnosis of coliform infection in acutely dysuric women. , 1982, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  S. Finegold,et al.  Clostridium difficile and its cytotoxin in feces of patients with antimicrobial agent-associated diarrhea and miscellaneous conditions , 1982, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[20]  L. A. Thibodeaul Evaluating Diagnostic Tests , 1981 .

[21]  T. Kurzynski,et al.  Evaluation of techniques for isolation of group A streptococci from throat cultures , 1981, Journal of clinical microbiology.

[22]  M Staquet,et al.  Methodology for the assessment of new dichotomous diagnostic tests. , 1981, Journal of chronic diseases.

[23]  S. Walter,et al.  Estimating the error rates of diagnostic tests. , 1980, Biometrics.

[24]  R. Fletcher,et al.  Clinical research in general medical journals: a 30-year perspective. , 1979, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  A. Feinstein,et al.  Problems of spectrum and bias in evaluating the efficacy of diagnostic tests. , 1978, The New England journal of medicine.

[26]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1973 .

[27]  C. Proctor,et al.  Testing independence in two-way contingency tables with data subject to misclassification , 1967, Psychometrika.

[28]  J J Gart,et al.  Comparison of a screening test and a reference test in epidemiologic studies. I. Indices of agreement and their relation to prevalence. , 1966, American journal of epidemiology.

[29]  R. Anderson,et al.  AN INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECT OF MISCLASSIFICATION ON THE PROPERTIES OF CHI-2-TESTS IN THE ANALYSIS OF CATEGORICAL DATA. , 1965, Biometrika.

[30]  A. Keys,et al.  Effect of Misclassification on Estimated Relative Prevalence of a Characteristic: Part I. Two Populations Infallibly Distinguished. Part II. Errors in Two Variables , 1963 .

[31]  A. Lilienfeld,et al.  Effects of errors in classification and diagnosis in various types of epidemiological-studies. , 1962, American journal of public health and the nation's health.

[32]  G. Stollerman,et al.  Controlled Studies of Streptococcal Pharyngitis in a Pediatric Population , 1961 .

[33]  I. Bross Misclassification in 2 X 2 Tables , 1954 .

[34]  J. Yerushalmy Statistical problems in assessing methods of medical diagnosis, with special reference to X-ray techniques. , 1947, Public health reports.