Empirical Evidence of Design-Related Bias in Studies of Diagnostic Tests

Author(s)
Lijmer, J. G., Mol, B. W., Heisterkamp, S., Bonsel, G. J., Prins, M. H. van der Meulen, J. H. P. and Bossuyt, P. M. M.
Publication language
English
Pages
7pp
Date published
01 Jan 1999
Publisher
JAMA
Type
Articles
Keywords
Research methodology
Link
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=191668

Context The literature contains a large number of potential biases in the evaluation of diagnostic tests. Strict application of appropriate methodological criteria would invalidate the clinical application of most study results.

Objective To empirically determine the quantitative effect of study design shortcomings on estimates of diagnostic accuracy.

Design and Setting Observational study of the methodological features of 184 original studies evaluating 218 diagnostic tests. Meta-analyses on diagnostic tests were identified through a systematic search of the literature using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and DARE databases and the Cochrane Library (1996-1997). Associations between study characteristics and estimates of diagnostic accuracy were evaluated with a regression model.

Main Outcome Measures Relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR), which compared the diagnostic odds ratios of studies of a given test that lacked a particular methodological feature with those without the corresponding shortcomings in design.