方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 实用诊断准确性研究× | 队列研究× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 流行病学 | 流行病学 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 2000s–2010s (formalized alongside STARD reporting guidelines) | Mid-20th century (formal epidemiological design codified ~1950s) |
| 提出者≠ | Evolved from STARD initiative (Bossuyt et al.) and pragmatic trial framework (Schwartz & Lellouch, 1967) | Doll & Hill (British Doctors Study, 1951); Snow (cholera, 1854) |
| 类型≠ | Observational diagnostic study design | Observational longitudinal study design |
| 开创性文献≠ | Bossuyt, P. M., et al. (2015). STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. BMJ, 351, h5527. DOI ↗ | Rothman, K. J., Greenland, S., & Lash, T. L. (2008). Modern Epidemiology (3rd ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. ISBN: 978-0781755641 |
| 别名 | real-world diagnostic accuracy study, pragmatic DAS, routine-care diagnostic study, pragmatic test evaluation | longitudinal study, follow-up study, panel study, incidence study |
| 相关 | 6 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | 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 cohort study assembles a group of individuals who share a common starting point — typically freedom from the outcome of interest — and follows them over time to observe who develops the outcome. By comparing incidence rates between exposed and unexposed subgroups, researchers can estimate relative risk and absolute risk differences. Cohort studies are the gold-standard observational design for measuring disease incidence and establishing temporal relationships between exposure and outcome. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|