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.
Published 3 November 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b3823
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b3823
Jenny Doust, professor of public health
1 Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD 4029, Australia
jdoust@bond.edu.au
Having a sense of the accuracy of diagnostic tests will help general practitioners to interpret and use the tests appropriately and, as in the example of chest pain, avoid unnecessary testing (doi:10.1136/bmj.b4117)
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Diagnostic tests—whether clinical signs, imaging, or laboratory tests—are imperfect: there is always a possibility that test results are inaccurate and our diagnosis is wrong. However, we need to make decisions about whether to treat or not to treat patients, and so we need to feel confident that our diagnosis is above a certain threshold before we decide to treat a patient and below a certain threshold if we decide to withhold treatment. The threshold depends on the disease and the potential harms and benefits of treating or not treating patients. Unless we have clear strategies to cope with the uncertainties of testing, false positive results mislead us to treat some patients unnecessarily and false negative results lead us to fail to treat some patients adequately or in time.
Probabilistic reasoning is used when we consider the diagnostic accuracy of tests in our clinical decisions. It is also called Bayesian reasoning,
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses