Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 1/2012

Open Access 01-06-2012 | Health Policy

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews

Author: David B. Matchar, MD, FACP, FAHA

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Special Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Evaluation of medical tests presents challenges distinct from those involved in the evaluation of therapies; in particular, the very great importance of context and the dearth of comprehensive RCTs aimed at comparing the clinical outcomes of different tests and test strategies. Available guidance provides some suggestions: 1) Use of the PICOTS typology for clarifying the context relevant to the review, and 2) use of an organizing framework for classifying the types of medical test evaluation studies and their relationship to potential key questions. However, there is a diversity of recommendations for reviewers of medical tests and a proliferation of concepts, terms, and methods. As a contribution to the field, this Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews seeks to provide practical guidance for achieving the goals of clarity, consistency, tractability, and usefulness.
Literature
1.
2.
Siebert U. When should decision analytic modeling be used in the economic evaluation of health care? Eur J Health Econ. 2003;4(3):143–50.CrossRef
3.
Tatsioni A, Zarin DA, Aronson N, et al. Challenges in systematic reviews of diagnostic technologies. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142(12 Pt 2):1048–55.PubMed
4.
Bossuyt PM, Lijmer JG, Mol BW. Randomised comparisons of medical tests: sometimes invalid, not always efficient. Lancet. 2000;356:1844–7.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Lord SJ, Irwig L, Simes J. When is measuring sensitivity and specificity sufficient to evaluate a diagnostic test, and when do we need a randomized trial? Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(11):850–5.PubMed
6.
Lijmer JG, Leeflang M, Bossuyt PM. Proposals for a phased evaluation of medical tests. Med Decis Making. 2009;29(5):E13–21.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Lord SJ, Irwig L, Bossuyt PM. Using the principles of randomized controlled trial design to guide test evaluation. Med Decis Making. 2009;29(5):E1–E12.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Sun F, Bruening W, Erinoff E, et al. Evaluation frameworks, analytic validity and quality rating of genetic tests. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment (Prepared by the ECRI Institute Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. HHSA 290-2007-10063-I.) AHRQ Publication. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. In press.
9.
Green DM, Swets JA. Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley; 1966. Reprinted with corrections and an updated topical bibliography by Peninsula Publishing, Los Altos, CA, 1988.
10.
11.
Yerushalmy J. Statistical problems in assessing methods of medical diagnosis, with special reference to x-ray techniques. Public Health Rep. 1947;62:1432–49.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Battista RN, Fletcher SW. Making recommendations on preventive practices: methodological issues. In: Battista RN, Lawrence RS, editors. Implementing Preventive Services. Suppl to Am J Prev Med. 1988;4(4):53–67. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
13.
Bravata DM, McDonald KM, Shojania KG, Sundaram V, Owens DK. Challenges in systematic reviews: synthesis of topics related to the delivery, organization, and financing of health care. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142(Suppl):1056–1065.PubMed
14.
Mulrow CM, Langhorne P, Grimshaw J. Integrating heterogeneous pieces of evidence in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):989–995.PubMed
15.
Whitlock EP, Orleans T, Pender N, Allan J. Evaluating primary care behavioral counseling interventions: an evidence-based approach. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22(4):267–284.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Woolf SH. Interim manual for clinical practice guideline development: a protocol for expert panels convened by the office of the forum for quality and effectiveness in health care. AHRQ Publication No. 91–0018. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1991.
17.
Woolf SH. An organized analytic framework for practice guideline development: using the analytic logic as a guide for reviewing evidence, developing recommendations, and explaining the rationale. In: McCormick KA, Moore SR, Siegel RA, editors. Methodology perspectives: clinical practice guideline development. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 1994. p. 105–13.
18.
19.
O’Connor D, Green S, Higgins J. Chapter 5: Defining the review question and developing criteria for including studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors, Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. Available from www.​cochrane-handbook.​org. Accessed July 12, 2010.
20.
21.
National Office of Public Health Genomics. ACCE: a CDC-sponsored project carried out by the Foundation of Blood Research [Internet]. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); 2007 Dec 11.
22.
Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making. 1991;11(2):88–94.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, et al. Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001;20(3 Suppl):21–35.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Chalmers I, Hedges LV, Cooper H. A brief history of research synthesis. Eval Health Prof. 2002;25(1):12–37.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews
Author
David B. Matchar, MD, FACP, FAHA
Publication date
01-06-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue Special Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-011-1798-2

Other articles of this Special Issue 1/2012

Journal of General Internal Medicine 1/2012 Go to the issue

Original Research

Chapter 9: Options for Summarizing Medical Test Performance in the Absence of a “Gold Standard”

Original Research

Chapter 2: Medical Tests Guidance (2) Developing the Topic and Structuring Systematic Reviews of Medical Tests: Utility of PICOTS, Analytic Frameworks, Decision Trees, and Other Frameworks

Editorials

Methods Guide for Authors of Systematic Reviews of Medical Tests: A Collaboration Between the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Journal of General Internal Medicine

Original Research

Chapter 7: Grading a Body of Evidence on Diagnostic Tests

Reviews

Chapter 6: Assessing Applicability of Medical Test Studies in Systematic Reviews

Original Research

Chapter 11: Challenges in and Principles for Conducting Systematic Reviews of Genetic Tests used as Predictive Indicators
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Reserve your place

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

Read more

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Pediatric Cardiology Video

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

Cardiopulmonary Comorbidity Video

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Valvular Heart Disease Video

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits