Articlebronze2013

Diagnostic accuracy studies: how to report and analyse inconclusive test results

Bethany Shinkins · Susan Mallett · Rafael Perera

142 citations0/0 files storedBMJ

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

Meta-analysis and systematic reviews Statistical Methods in Epidemiology Clinical practice guidelines implementation

Abstract

Failure to report inconclusive test results can lead to misleading conclusions regarding the accuracy and clinical usefulness of a diagnostic tool. We show that these results are often overlooked in research on test accuracy and provide guidance on suitable approaches to reporting and analysing these problematic results.

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 142 citations exist upstream.

References

2003The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews 2012Use of 3x2 tables with an intention to diagnose approach to assess clinical performance of diagnostic tests: meta-analytical evaluation of coronary CT angiography studies 1987Intermediate, Indeterminate, and Uninterpretable Diagnostic Test Results 2003The STARD initiative

Cited by

2022QUAPAS: An Adaptation of the QUADAS-2 Tool to Assess Prognostic Accuracy Studies 2022STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration 2021Forensic science and the principle of excluded middle: “Inconclusive” decisions and the structure of error rate studies 2021Inconclusives and error rates in forensic science: a signal detection theory approach 2022The strange persistence of (source) “identification” claims in forensic literature through descriptivism, diagnosticism and machinism 2022Statistical methods for evaluating the fine needle aspiration cytology procedure in breast cancer diagnosis 2023Missing values and inconclusive results in diagnostic studies – A scoping review of methods

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.