TY - JOUR
T1 - The influence of uninterpretability on the assessment of diagnostic tests
AU - Begg, Colin B.
AU - Greenes, Robert A.
AU - Iglewicz, Boris
PY - 1986
Y1 - 1986
N2 - A frequent problem faced by physicians utilizing diagnostic tests is the occurrence of uninterpretable test results. Such results, if they occur commonly, can seriously impair the diagnostic performance of the test. Moreover, in assessing the characteristics of the test, i.e. sensitivity, specificity, etc. failure to consider the impact of uninterpretability will artificially inflate the test characteristics. In this paper we explore the implications of this issue. We observe that a relevant factor is the potential repeatability of the test, i.e. whether the cause of uninterpretability is a transient phenomenon or an inherent property of the subject. We distinguish uninterpretable results, in which no result is obtained, from indeterminate results, in which the result is equivocal, or for which predisposing concomitant factors limit the interpretability of the result. Our results demonstrate that the naive approach of ignoring uninterpretable results in test assessments may indeed be unbiased in certain circumstances. However, if the cause of uninterpretability is related to disease status or to the potentially observable test result, then this approach will lead to bias. In either case, the frequency of uninterpretability is an important consideration in the cost-effectiveness of the test.
AB - A frequent problem faced by physicians utilizing diagnostic tests is the occurrence of uninterpretable test results. Such results, if they occur commonly, can seriously impair the diagnostic performance of the test. Moreover, in assessing the characteristics of the test, i.e. sensitivity, specificity, etc. failure to consider the impact of uninterpretability will artificially inflate the test characteristics. In this paper we explore the implications of this issue. We observe that a relevant factor is the potential repeatability of the test, i.e. whether the cause of uninterpretability is a transient phenomenon or an inherent property of the subject. We distinguish uninterpretable results, in which no result is obtained, from indeterminate results, in which the result is equivocal, or for which predisposing concomitant factors limit the interpretability of the result. Our results demonstrate that the naive approach of ignoring uninterpretable results in test assessments may indeed be unbiased in certain circumstances. However, if the cause of uninterpretability is related to disease status or to the potentially observable test result, then this approach will lead to bias. In either case, the frequency of uninterpretability is an important consideration in the cost-effectiveness of the test.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0022501491&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0022501491&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0021-9681(86)90182-7
DO - 10.1016/0021-9681(86)90182-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 3090089
AN - SCOPUS:0022501491
SN - 0021-9681
VL - 39
SP - 575
EP - 584
JO - Journal of Chronic Diseases
JF - Journal of Chronic Diseases
IS - 8
ER -