The influence of uninterpretability on the assessment of diagnostic tests

Colin B. Begg, Robert Greenes, Boris Iglewicz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

57 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)575-584
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Chronic Diseases
Volume39
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - 1986
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Routine Diagnostic Tests
Causality
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Physicians
Sensitivity and Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology

Cite this

The influence of uninterpretability on the assessment of diagnostic tests. / Begg, Colin B.; Greenes, Robert; Iglewicz, Boris.

In: Journal of Chronic Diseases, Vol. 39, No. 8, 1986, p. 575-584.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Begg, Colin B. ; Greenes, Robert ; Iglewicz, Boris. / The influence of uninterpretability on the assessment of diagnostic tests. In: Journal of Chronic Diseases. 1986 ; Vol. 39, No. 8. pp. 575-584.
@article{4921540364c04287a580e4fec98e0071,
title = "The influence of uninterpretability on the assessment of diagnostic tests",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Begg, {Colin B.} and Robert Greenes and Boris Iglewicz",
year = "1986",
doi = "10.1016/0021-9681(86)90182-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "575--584",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Epidemiology",
issn = "0895-4356",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The influence of uninterpretability on the assessment of diagnostic tests

AU - Begg, Colin B.

AU - Greenes, Robert

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

VL - 39

SP - 575

EP - 584

JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

SN - 0895-4356

IS - 8

ER -