Promise versus reality: optimism bias in package inserts for tuberculosis diagnostics
- PMID: 22573592
- PMCID: PMC3405594
- DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00842-12
Promise versus reality: optimism bias in package inserts for tuberculosis diagnostics
Abstract
Laboratorians and clinicians often rely on package inserts of diagnostic tests to assess their accuracy. We compared test accuracy for tuberculosis diagnostics reported in 19 package inserts against estimates in published meta-analyses and found that package inserts generally report overoptimistic accuracy estimates. However, package inserts of most tests approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or endorsed by the World Health Organization provide more realistic estimates that agree with meta-analyses.
References
-
- Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. 2003. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 289:454–465 - PubMed
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 2009. Updated guidelines for the use of nucleic acid amplification tests in the diagnosis of tuberculosis. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 58:7–10 - PubMed
-
- Chang K, et al. 27 February 2012. Rapid and effective diagnosis of tuberculosis and rifampicin resistance with Xpert MTB/RIF assay: a meta-analysis. J. Infect. 64:580–588 - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical