Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Greaves, Ronda / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 3.638

CiteScore 2018: 2.44

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 1.191
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 1.205

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 47, Issue 11

Issues

Meta-analyses of diagnostic studies

Ton J. Cleophas
  • European Interuniversity College of Pharmaceutical Medicine, Lyon, France
  • Albert Schweitzer Hospital Dordrecht, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Aeilko H. Zwinderman
  • European Interuniversity College of Pharmaceutical Medicine, Lyon, France
  • Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2009-10-12 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2009.317

Abstract

Background: Diagnostic reviews often include the sensitivity/specificity results of individual studies. A problem occurs when these data are pooled because the correlation between sensitivity and specificity is generally strongly negative, causing overestimation of the pooled results. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), defined as the odds of true positives vs. that of false positives, may avoid this problem. The aim of the study was to review the advantages and limitations of the DORs.

Methods: A systematic review of 44 previously published diagnostic studies was used as an example.

Results: DORs can be readily implemented in diagnostic research. Advantages include: (1) they adjust for the negative and curvilinear correlations between sensitivities and specificities, (2) they take account of the heterogeneity between studies with respect to the different thresholds chosen by the investigators in the original studies, and (3) it is easy to extend the model with covariates representing between-study differences in design. Limitations include: 1) the outcome parameter is a summary estimate of both sensitivity and specificity, and 2) the magnitude of the studies included is not taken into account.

Conclusions: Reported sensitivities and specificities of different studies assessing similar diagnostic tests are not only negatively correlated, but also negatively correlated in a curvilinear manner. It is appropriate to take this negative curvilinear correlation into account in the data pooling of such meta-analyses. The DORs can be applied for that purpose.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:1351–4.

Keywords: diagnostic odds ratios; false negative rate; false positive rate; meta-analysis; qualitative diagnostic studies; ROC curves; sensitivity; specificity; summary ROC curves; true negative rate; true positive rate

About the article

Corresponding author: Ton J. Cleophas, MD, PhD, Professor, European College of Pharmaceutical Medicine, Lyon France, c/o Department Medicine Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht Netherlands, Box 444, 3300 AK Dordrecht, Netherlands Phone: +31 184 43422, Fax: +31 184 434340,


Received: 2009-06-01

Accepted: 2009-07-24

Published Online: 2009-10-12

Published in Print: 2009-11-01


Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Volume 47, Issue 11, Pages 1351–1354, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2009.317.

Export Citation

©2009 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Do Hyun Kim, Seoungmin Lee, and Se Hwan Hwang
Otology & Neurotology, 2019, Volume 40, Number 9, Page 1126
[2]
Qiang Zheng, Weibiao Kang, Changyu Chen, Xinxin Shi, Yang Yang, and Changjun Yu
Medicine, 2019, Volume 98, Number 34, Page e16940
[3]
Weiying Yu, Changgui Kou, Wei Bai, Xiao Yu, Ruixin Duan, Bo Zhu, Yuanyuan Li, Wanqing Hua, Xiaojun Ren, Yanming Yang, and Anthony F. Shields
PLOS ONE, 2019, Volume 14, Number 7, Page e0220080
[4]
[5]
Min Tang, Zhenghua Deng, Baolin Li, Ying Peng, Min Song, and Jinbo Liu
The International Journal of Biological Markers, 2017, Volume 32, Number 4, Page 421
[7]
Tian’an Jiang, Guo Tian, Qiyu Zhao, Dexing Kong, Chao Cheng, Liyun Zhong, Lanjuan Li, and Lanjing Zhang
PLOS ONE, 2016, Volume 11, Number 6, Page e0157219
[8]
Ting-Ting Wei, Zhi-De Hu, Bao-Dong Qin, Ning Ma, Qing-Qin Tang, Li-Li Wang, Lin Zhou, and Ren-Qian Zhong
Medicine, 2016, Volume 95, Number 11, Page e3079
[9]
Shupeng Cheng, Jialin Yu, Min Zhou, Yan Tu, and Qi Lu
BioMed Research International, 2015, Volume 2015, Page 1
[10]
Cheng Xu, Zhehui Yan, Liang Zhou, and Yuming Wang
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, 2013, Volume 139, Number 8, Page 1417
[11]
Yuan-Lan Huang, Jie Chen, Wei Yan, Ding Zang, Qin Qin, and An-Mei Deng
Tumor Biology, 2015, Volume 36, Number 5, Page 3137
[12]
Haiting Xie, Tao Sun, Ming Chen, Hao Wang, Xin Zhou, Yunkai Zhang, Huanhong Zeng, Jilian Wang, and Wei Fu
Medicine, 2015, Volume 94, Number 6, Page e517
[13]
Zhaolian Lu, Yingjian Chen, Zhide Hu, and Chengjin Hu
International Journal of Gynecological Cancer, 2015, Volume 25, Number 1, Page 18
[14]
Yue-Ping Liu, Hai-Yan Wu, Xiang Yang, Han-Qing Xu, Dong Chen, Qing Huang, and Wei-Ling Fu
Scientific Reports, 2015, Volume 4, Number 1
[15]
Xiaobo Jia, Jiao Liu, Yingtang Gao, Yong Huang, and Zhi Du
Archives of Medical Research, 2014, Volume 45, Number 7, Page 580
[16]
Zhi-De Hu, Xiao-Fei Liu, Xiao-Cui Liu, Chun-Mei Ding, and Cheng-Jin Hu
Clinica Chimica Acta, 2014, Volume 433, Page 44
[17]
Joseph D Tucker, Jin Bu, Lillian B Brown, Yue-Pin Yin, Xiang-Sheng Chen, and Myron S Cohen
The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2010, Volume 10, Number 6, Page 381
[18]
Xiao-Fei Liu, Zhi-De Hu, Xiao-Cui Liu, Yuan Cao, Chun-Mei Ding, and Cheng-Jin Hu
Clinical Biochemistry, 2014, Volume 47, Number 3, Page 196
[19]
Zhide Hu, Zhijun Han, Yuanlan Huang, Yi Sun, Bo Li, and Anmei Deng
Clinical Biochemistry, 2012, Volume 45, Number 18, Page 1634
[20]
Gerta Rücker and Martin Schumacher
Statistics in Medicine, 2010, Volume 29, Number 30, Page 3069

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in