Ransohoff D F, Feinstein A R
N Engl J Med. 1978 Oct 26;299(17):926-30. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197810262991705.
To determine why many diagnostic tests have proved to be valueless after optimistic introduction into medical practice, we reviewed a series of investigations and identified two major problems that can cause erroneous statistical results for the "sensitivity" and "specificity" indexes of diagnostic efficacy. Unless an appropriately broad spectrum is chosen for the diseased and nondiseased patients who comprise the study population, the diagnostic test may receive falsely high values for its "rule-in" and "rule-out" performances. Unless the interpretation of the test and the establishment of the true diagnosis are done independently, bias may falsely elevate the test's efficacy. Avoidance of these problems might have prevented the early optimism and subsequent disillusionment with the diagnostic value of two selected examples: the carcinoembryonic antigen and nitro-blue tetrazolium tests.
为了确定为何许多诊断测试在被乐观地引入医学实践后被证明毫无价值,我们回顾了一系列调查,并确定了两个主要问题,这两个问题可能会导致诊断效能的“敏感性”和“特异性”指标出现错误的统计结果。除非为构成研究人群的患病和未患病患者选择适当广泛的范围,否则诊断测试的“纳入”和“排除”性能可能会得到虚假的高值。除非对测试的解释和真实诊断的确定是独立进行的,否则偏差可能会错误地提高测试的效能。避免这些问题可能会避免早期的乐观情绪以及随后对两个选定例子(癌胚抗原和硝基蓝四唑试验)的诊断价值的幻灭。