Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Oct 7:2:82.
doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-82.

Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews

Affiliations

Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews

Mariska M G Leeflang et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

In 1996, shortly after the founding of The Cochrane Collaboration, leading figures in test evaluation research established a Methods Group to focus on the relatively new and rapidly evolving methods for the systematic review of studies of diagnostic tests. Seven years later, the Collaboration decided it was time to develop a publication format and methodology for Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) reviews, as well as the software needed to implement these reviews in The Cochrane Library. A meeting hosted by the German Cochrane Centre in 2004 brought together key methodologists in the area, many of whom became closely involved in the subsequent development of the methodological framework for DTA reviews. DTA reviews first appeared in The Cochrane Library in 2008 and are now an integral part of the work of the Collaboration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Summary receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots showing test accuracy of cytology for detecting primary bladder cancer [32]. A) The summary ROC curve, representing the underlying relationship between sensitivity and specificity for the test across varying thresholds. B) The summary sensitivity and specificity and a 95% confidence region around it. The smaller oval shaped symbols in both graphs show the individual study results, with the height of the symbol representing the number of diseased individuals and the width of the ovals representing the number of non-diseased individuals.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Feinstein AR. Misguided efforts and future challenges for research on “diagnostic tests”. J Epidemiol Comm Health. 2002;56:330–332. doi: 10.1136/jech.56.5.330. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mulherin SA, Miller WC. Spectrum bias or spectrum effect? Subgroup variation in diagnostic test evaluation. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:598–602. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-137-7-200210010-00011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S. QUADAS-2 Steering Group. A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:1093–1104. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.05.014. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lord SJ, Irwig L, Simes RJ. When is measuring sensitivity and specificity sufficient to evaluate a diagnostic test, and when do we need randomized trials? Ann Intern Med. 2006;144:850–855. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-144-11-200606060-00011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Irwig L, Tosteson AN, Gatsonis C, Lau J, Colditz G, Chalmers TC, Mosteller F. Guidelines for meta-analyses evaluating diagnostic tests. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:667–676. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-120-8-199404150-00008. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources