Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 40: 1621-1627, 1994;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Silverstein, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Boland, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Silverstein, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Boland, B. J.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 40, 1621-1627, Copyright © 1994 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Conceptual framework for evaluating laboratory tests: case-finding in ambulatory patients

MD Silverstein and BJ Boland
Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905.

In response to concerns about inappropriate testing and healthcare costs, clinicians and laboratorians should work together to evaluate laboratory tests. Studies of routine laboratory tests ordered for screening and case-finding in the preoperative setting, at hospital admission, and in the ambulatory setting have not provided sufficient evidence of the benefits of case-finding when evaluated against commonly used criteria for screening procedures. We adapt a conceptual framework developed from radiology for evaluating imaging technologies to evaluate laboratory tests. The framework addresses diagnostic efficacy (whether the test correctly identifies abnormalities), diagnostic effectiveness (whether the test changes the physician's diagnoses), therapeutic efficacy (whether the test changes patient management), and therapeutic effectiveness (whether the test changes patients' outcomes). We propose that clinicians and laboratorians use this framework to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy, diagnostic effectiveness, therapeutic efficacy, and therapeutic effectiveness of laboratory tests in the ambulatory setting and in other settings.


The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
Cleveland Clinic Journal of MedicineHome page
D. L. HEPNER
The role of testing in the preoperative evaluation
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine, November 1, 2009; 76(Suppl_4): S22 - S27.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Med Decis MakingHome page
J. G. Lijmer, M. Leeflang, and P. M. M. Bossuyt
Proposals for a Phased Evaluation of Medical Tests
Med Decis Making, September 1, 2009; 29(5): E13 - E21.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
C. P. Price
Evidence-based Laboratory Medicine: Supporting Decision-Making
Clin. Chem., August 1, 2000; 46(8): 1041 - 1050.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.