Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Studiu pragmatic de acuratețe diagnostică× | Studiu prospectiv de acuratețe diagnostică× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Epidemiologie | Epidemiologie |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 2000s–2010s (formalized alongside STARD reporting guidelines) | Formalized 2000s; practice dates to mid-20th century |
| Autorul original≠ | Evolved from STARD initiative (Bossuyt et al.) and pragmatic trial framework (Schwartz & Lellouch, 1967) | Established through STARD initiative (Bossuyt, Reitsma et al., 2000s) |
| Tip≠ | Observational diagnostic study design | Observational / evaluative study design |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Bossuyt, P. M., et al. (2015). STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. BMJ, 351, h5527. DOI ↗ | Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L., ... & Cohen, J. F. (2015). STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. BMJ, 351, h5527. DOI ↗ |
| Denumiri alternative | real-world diagnostic accuracy study, pragmatic DAS, routine-care diagnostic study, pragmatic test evaluation | prospective DTA study, prospective test accuracy study, forward-looking diagnostic study, prospective index test evaluation |
| Înrudite | 6 | 6 |
| Rezumat≠ | A pragmatic diagnostic accuracy study evaluates how well a diagnostic test performs under real-world clinical conditions — not in idealized, tightly controlled settings. Conducted within routine care workflows, it measures sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios for an index test against a reference standard, yielding accuracy estimates directly applicable to clinical practice rather than laboratory benchmarks. | A prospective diagnostic accuracy study enrolls participants before any test results are known and follows them forward in time to evaluate how well an index test (the test under evaluation) distinguishes individuals with and without a target condition, using a reference standard applied independently. Key accuracy metrics include sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and the area under the ROC curve. The prospective design reduces many biases inherent in retrospective test evaluations. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|