ScholarGate
Pembantu

Bandingkan kaedah

Semak kaedah pilihan anda secara bersebelahan; baris yang berbeza akan diserlahkan.

Kajian Meta-Analitik Ketepatan Diagnostik×Reka Bentuk Kajian Ketepatan Diagnostik×Penilaian Ujian Saringan×
BidangEpidemiologiPenyelidikan KlinikalEpidemiologi
KeluargaProcess / pipelineProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Tahun asal1993–2005 (foundational models)2003-20151968 (Wilson-Jungner principles); statistical framework developed 1970s–2000s
PengasasMoses, Shapiro & Littenberg (SROC framework, 1993); Reitsma et al. (bivariate model, 2005)Bossuyt, Reitsma, and STARD group (2003); clinical epidemiology pioneersWilson & Jungner (WHO criteria, 1968); foundational work by Pepe, Altman, and others in statistical test evaluation
JenisQuantitative systematic synthesisResearch DesignObservational diagnostic / epidemiological evaluation design
Sumber perintisReitsma, J. B., Glas, A. S., Rutjes, A. W., Scholten, R. J., Bossuyt, P. M., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2005). Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58(10), 982–990. DOI ↗Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., ... & de Vet, H. C. (2003). Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Annals of Internal Medicine, 138(1), 40–44. DOI ↗Wilson, J. M. G., & Jungner, G. (1968). Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. World Health Organization. Public Health Papers No. 34. link ↗
AliasDTA meta-analysis, diagnostic meta-analysis, systematic review of diagnostic accuracy, pooled diagnostic accuracydiagnostic accuracy study, test accuracy, STARD, diagnostic evaluationscreening study, screening performance evaluation, screening accuracy assessment, STE
Berkaitan226
RingkasanA meta-analytic diagnostic accuracy study systematically identifies and pools sensitivity and specificity data from multiple primary diagnostic test accuracy studies. Using the bivariate or hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) model, it produces a joint summary of a test's ability to correctly classify diseased and non-diseased individuals across diverse clinical settings, accounting for the inherent trade-off between sensitivity and specificity.A diagnostic accuracy study evaluates how well a new diagnostic test (or biomarker, imaging modality, clinical assessment) detects the presence or absence of disease compared to a reference standard (gold standard). Standardized since 2003 by the STARD (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) initiative, diagnostic accuracy studies are fundamental to clinical medicine, determining whether and how new tests can improve patient diagnosis and treatment.Screening test evaluation is a systematic epidemiological approach for assessing whether a test or program can accurately and cost-effectively identify individuals with a condition before symptoms appear. It quantifies diagnostic performance metrics — sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and the ROC curve — and evaluates whether a screening program meets established public health criteria for adoption and harm-benefit balance.
ScholarGateSet data
  1. v1
  2. 2 Sumber
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Sumber
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Sumber
  3. PUBLISHED

Pergi ke carian Muat turun slaid

ScholarGateBandingkan kaedah: Meta-analytic Diagnostic Accuracy Study · Diagnostic Accuracy Study Design · Screening Test Evaluation. Dicapai 2026-06-17 daripada https://scholargate.app/ms/compare