Register | Recover lost password?
Username
Password

About the Site:

This is the blog for the book Medical Decision Making: A Physician's Guide, by Alan Schwartz and George Bergus (Cambridge University Press, 2008). The book is now available from Cambridge University Press

About the Authors:

Alan Schwartz, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Medical Education and Pediatrics at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine, where he teaches and conducts research on physician and patient decision making.

George Bergus, M.D., M.A. is the Dr. William and Sondra Myers Family Professor of Family Medicine at the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, and Co-Director of the Family Practice/Psychiatry Residency program. He holds a Certificate of Additional Qualification in Geriatrics.

Categories:

Calendar

September 2010
M T W T F S S
« Mar    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  


Evidence-based diagnosis

October 19th, 2008 by Alan Schwartz

I’m writing from Philadelphia, at the annual meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making. I’ve just had the pleasure of attending a great short course entitled “How to discuss evidence-based diagnosis with experienced clinicians (and avoid giving EBM at bad name)”, taught by Tom Newman and Mike Kohn from UCSF.

My goal in intending the course was to hear about more advanced issues in the evaluation of diagnostic test evidence that I could use to enhance my own teaching as the residents and faculty I teach become increasingly more skilled in the basics. The course did a great job of doing this. After reviewing basic concepts that readers of our book should be familiar with (sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, LR+, LR-, ROC curves), Mike and Tom delved into detailed discussion of continuous and multi-valued tests, focusing particularly on the calculation of interval likelihood ratios.

I’ll illustrate with an example from Medical Decision Making: A Physician’s Guide. In chapter 10, figure 10-3 shows the ROC curve for the 13C-urea breath test at 30 minutes for H. Pylori infection, based on data from a paper by Herold and Becker (BMC Gastroenterology 2002; 2). The curve is based on test values called “delta-δ”; here’s a partial table of test characteristics based loosely on that figure:

Test value (“delta-δ”) Sensitivity Specificity
0 1 0
0.5 0.999 0.03
1 0.99 0.20
3 0.95 0.80
10 0.80 0.95
25 0.35 0.99

In some papers (not Herold and Becker’s), tables like these are then used to compute the positive and negative likelihood ratio at different test values used as thresholds. Mike and Tom point out that this not only throws out a lot of useful information, but can even be misleading when test values are not normally distributed (for example, if both low and high values are problematic).

An interval likelihood ratio is a likelihood ratio for a test result between two test values. This is what you want, and here’s how it looks:

Test value interval LR(interval)
0-0.5 0.03
0.5-1 0.05
1-3 0.07
3-10 1
10-25 11.3
>25 35

If your test result was 0.7, you’d use the LR for the 0.5-1 interval; if your result was 15, you’d use the LR for the 10-25 interval. By constructing reasonable intervals, you get to take advantage of much more information than creating dichotomous thresholds. (How do you compute those LRs? It’s easy. The interval LR for the interval 1-3 is the absolute difference in sensitivity between delta-δ=1 and delta-δ=3 (0.99-0.95 = 0.04), divided by the absolute difference in specificity between delta-δ=1 and delta-δ=3 (0.80-0.20=0.60).

They also presented some very nice techniques for teaching physicians how to understand ROC curves, and several important nuances around evaluating the validity of diagnostic test studies.

The course was based on their forthcoming book, Evidence-Based Diagnosis, due out in 2009. It’s now on my “must buy” list.

Posted in Developing information | No Comments »

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.