Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2005;330:1330 (4 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7503.1330
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORGluud and Gluud compare the introduction of new diagnostic tests with that of a new drug.1 However, laboratory diagnostic tests need only to prove that they are able to measure a given analyte, not that the measurement is of any use in managing patients. An inappropriately used test may have "side effects" leading to a delay in diagnosis or further investigation for a condition that the test result has wrongly suggested. Conversely, the introduction of a valuable test in the United Kingdom can often be piecemeal, subject to the vagaries of particular clinicians' demand and the priorities of local funding.
Gluud and Gluud mention using the pharmaceutical model effectively to "license" a clinical test for use. In the UK this would require a joint approach from the diagnostics industry and a Department of Health agency to acquire sufficient information on the clinical utility of a new test before
Eric S Kilpatrick, consultant in chemical pathology
Hull Royal Infirmary, Hull HU3 2JZ Eric.Kilpatrick@hey.nhs.uk
Read all Rapid Responses