Methodology in Diagnostic Laboratory Test Research in Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

Author:

Lumbreras-Lacarra Blanca1,Ramos-Rincón José Manuel2,Hernández-Aguado Ildefonso3

Affiliation:

1. Department of Clinic Analysis, General University Hospital of Alicante, Alicante, Spain

2. Department of Internal Medicine, General University Hospital of Elche, Elche, Spain

3. Department of Public Health, University of Miguel Hernández, San Juan de Alicante, Spain

Abstract

Abstract Background: The application of epidemiologic principles to clinical diagnosis has been less developed than in other clinical areas. Knowledge of the main flaws affecting diagnostic laboratory test research is the first step for improving its quality. We assessed the methodologic aspects of articles on laboratory tests. Methods: We included articles that estimated indexes of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) and were published in Clinical Chemistry or Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine in 1996, 2001, and 2002. Clinical Chemistry has paid special attention to this field of research since 1996 by publishing recommendations, checklists, and reviews. Articles were identified through electronic searches in Medline. The strategy combined the Mesh term “sensitivity and specificity” (exploded) with the text words “specificity”, “false negative”, and “accuracy”. We examined adherence to seven methodologic criteria used in the study by Reid et al. (JAMA1995;274:645–51) of papers published in general medical journals. Three observers evaluated each article independently. Results: Seventy-nine articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The percentage of studies that satisfied each criterion improved from 1996 to 2002. Substantial improvement was observed in reporting of the statistical uncertainty of indices of diagnostic accuracy, in criteria based on clinical information from the study population (spectrum composition), and in avoidance of workup bias. Analytical reproducibility was reported frequently (68%), whereas information about indeterminate results was rarely provided. The mean number of methodologic criteria satisfied showed a statistically significant increase over the 3 years in Clinical Chemistry but not in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Conclusions: The methodologic quality of the articles on diagnostic test research published in Clinical Chemistry and Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine is comparable to the quality observed in the best general medical journals. The methodologic aspects that most need improvement are those linked to the clinical information of the populations studied. Editorial actions aimed to increase the quality of reporting of diagnostic studies could have a relevant positive effect, as shown by the improvement observed in Clinical Chemistry.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Biochemistry, medical,Clinical Biochemistry

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3