Test accuracy and potential sources of bias in diagnostic test evaluation

• 1 University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW
• 2 Westmead Clinical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW

Series editors

John R Attia

Michael P Jones

---

• 1. Albarqouni L, Hoffmann T, Straus S, et al. Core competencies in evidence‐based practice for health professionals: consensus statement based on a systematic review and delphi survey. JAMA Netw Open 2018; 1: e180281.
• 2. Irwig L, Tosteson ANA, Gatsonis C, et al. Guidelines for meta‐analyses evaluating diagnostic tests. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 667–676.
• 3. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. BMJ 2015; 351: h5527.
• 4. Mallouhi A, Felber S, Chemelli A, et al. Detection and characterization of intracranial aneurysms with MR angiography: comparison of volume‐rendering and maximum‐intensity‐projection algorithms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 55–64.
• 5. Bossuyt PM, Irwig L, Craig J, Glasziou P. Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. BMJ 2006; 332: 1089–1092.
• 6. Miller TD, White PM, Davenport RJ, et al. Screening patients with a family history of subarachnoid haemorrhage for intracranial aneurysms: screening uptake, patient characteristics and outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Res 2012; 83: 86.
• 7. Leeflang MM, Bossuyt PM, Irwig L. Diagnostic test accuracy may vary with prevalence: implications for evidence‐based diagnosis. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 5–12.
• 8. Choi BC. Slopes of a receiver operating characteristic curve and likelihood ratios for a diagnostic test. Am J Epidemiol 1998; 148: 1127–1132.
• 9. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143: 29–36.
• 10. Macaskill P, Gatsonis C, Deeks JJ, Harbord RM, Y. T. Chapter 10: Analysing and presenting results. In: Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM, Gatsonis C, editors. Handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy, version 10. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2010. https://methods.cochrane.org/sites/methods.cochrane.org.sdt/files/public/uploads/Chapter%2010%20-%20Version%201.0.pdf (viewed Nov 2019).
• 11. Bossuyt P, Davenport C, Deeks J, et al. Chapter 11: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM, Gatsonis C, editors. Handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy, version 9 The Cochrane Collaboration, 2013. https://methods.cochrane.org/sites/methods.cochrane.org.sdt/files/public/uploads/DTA%20Handbook%20Chapter%2011%20201312.pdf (viewed Nov 2019).
• 12. Straus SE, Glasziou P, Richardson WS, Haynes RB. Evidence‐based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. Amsterdam: Elselvier, 2019.
• 13. Leeflang MM, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, Bossuyt PM. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Ann Intern Med 2008; 149: 889–897.
• 14. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S. A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2013; 66: 1093–1104.
• 15. Walter SD, Macaskill P, Lord SJ, Irwig L. Effect of dependent errors in the assessment of diagnostic or screening test accuracy when the reference standard is imperfect. Stat Med 2012; 31: 1129–1138.