Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Radiology 13/2018

01-12-2018 | Original Article

Unfounded conclusions of equivalence in diagnostic accuracy studies: a pervasive fallacy of inference in pediatric radiology scientific abstracts

Authors: Lauren A. May, R. Paul Guillerman, Wei Zhang, Robert C. Orth

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Issue 13/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In studies of diagnostic performance that fail to detect a statistically significant difference between compared techniques, investigators often declare evidence of equivalence or similarity without having actually tested that assertion due to incorrect methodology or insufficient statistical power.

Objective

The purpose of our investigation is to measure the prevalence of unfounded assertions of equivalence or similarity in comparison studies presented at the International Pediatric Radiology (IPR) meeting of 2016 and promote awareness of this fallacy of inference to the pediatric radiology community.

Materials and methods

Two pediatric radiologists independently reviewed the methodology and reporting quality of the 194 scientific paper abstracts from the 2016 IPR meeting. All comparison studies were identified and those failing to detect a statistically significance difference and making a claim of equivalence or similarity in the results or conclusion were assessed for a description of the study design type, statistical power and sample size estimator calculation.

Results

Of 194 scientific paper abstracts, 112 (58%) were comparison studies. Of these, 36/112 (32%) made unfounded inferences of equivalence or similarity in diagnostic imaging performance. No study had an equivalence or non-inferiority design. No abstract specified the statistical power of the study, and only one abstract acknowledged a small sample size as a limitation in detecting a statistically significant difference.

Conclusion

Inadequate reporting and unfounded inferences of equivalence or similarity were common in diagnostic performance comparison studies presented at IPR 2016. Failure to recognize these limitations could have adverse consequences by leading to the adoption of unvalidated imaging techniques.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF et al (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 63:e1–e37CrossRef Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF et al (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol 63:e1–e37CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. BMJ 340:c332CrossRef Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. BMJ 340:c332CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Pocock SJ et al (2012) Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement. JAMA 308:2594–2604CrossRef Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Pocock SJ et al (2012) Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement. JAMA 308:2594–2604CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Bossuyt P, Reltsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2015) STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 277:826–832CrossRef Bossuyt P, Reltsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2015) STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 277:826–832CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Cohen JF, Koevaar DA, Gatsonis C et al (2017) STARD for abstracts: essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies in journal or conference abstracts. BMJ 358:j3751CrossRef Cohen JF, Koevaar DA, Gatsonis C et al (2017) STARD for abstracts: essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies in journal or conference abstracts. BMJ 358:j3751CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Park SH, Ahn S, Hong N et al (2014) Quality of reporting noninferiority/similarity in research studies of diagnostic imaging. Radiology 270:241–247CrossRef Park SH, Ahn S, Hong N et al (2014) Quality of reporting noninferiority/similarity in research studies of diagnostic imaging. Radiology 270:241–247CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Altman DG, Bland JM (1995) Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. BMJ 311:485CrossRef Altman DG, Bland JM (1995) Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. BMJ 311:485CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Costa LJ, Xavier AC, del Giglio A (2004) Negative results in cancer clinical trials: equivalence or poor accrual? Control Clin Trials 25:525–533CrossRef Costa LJ, Xavier AC, del Giglio A (2004) Negative results in cancer clinical trials: equivalence or poor accrual? Control Clin Trials 25:525–533CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Dimick JB, Diener-West M, Lipsett PA (2001) Negative results of randomized clinical trials published in the surgical literature: equivalency or error? Arch Surg 136:796–800CrossRef Dimick JB, Diener-West M, Lipsett PA (2001) Negative results of randomized clinical trials published in the surgical literature: equivalency or error? Arch Surg 136:796–800CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Greene WL, Concato J, Feinstein AR (2000) Claims of equivalence in medical research: are they supported by the evidence? Ann Intern Med 132:715–722CrossRef Greene WL, Concato J, Feinstein AR (2000) Claims of equivalence in medical research: are they supported by the evidence? Ann Intern Med 132:715–722CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Krysan DJ, Kemper AR (2002) Claims of equivalence in randomized controlled trials of the treatment of bacterial meningitis in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 21:753–758CrossRef Krysan DJ, Kemper AR (2002) Claims of equivalence in randomized controlled trials of the treatment of bacterial meningitis in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 21:753–758CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Urquia A, Carmichael J (2016) Functional magnetic resonance urography: adjunct non-contrast angiography increases diagnostic confidence in assessment of crossing vessels in pelvico-ureteric junction obstruction. Pediatr Radiol 46:S110 Urquia A, Carmichael J (2016) Functional magnetic resonance urography: adjunct non-contrast angiography increases diagnostic confidence in assessment of crossing vessels in pelvico-ureteric junction obstruction. Pediatr Radiol 46:S110
15.
go back to reference Ahn S, Park SH, Lee KH (2013) How to demonstrate similarity by using noninferiority and equivalence statistical testing in radiology research. Radiology 267:328–338CrossRef Ahn S, Park SH, Lee KH (2013) How to demonstrate similarity by using noninferiority and equivalence statistical testing in radiology research. Radiology 267:328–338CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Hahn S (2012) Understanding noninferiority trials. Korean J Pediatr 55:403–407CrossRef Hahn S (2012) Understanding noninferiority trials. Korean J Pediatr 55:403–407CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Unfounded conclusions of equivalence in diagnostic accuracy studies: a pervasive fallacy of inference in pediatric radiology scientific abstracts
Authors
Lauren A. May
R. Paul Guillerman
Wei Zhang
Robert C. Orth
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Pediatric Radiology / Issue 13/2018
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-018-4222-9

Other articles of this Issue 13/2018

Pediatric Radiology 13/2018 Go to the issue