Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Distraction from randomization in diagnostic research.

Cornelis J Biesheuvel1, Diederick E Grobbee, Karel G M Moons

  • 1Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands. corneb@health.usyd.edu.au

Annals of Epidemiology
|January 3, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Predicting the effects of blood pressure-lowering treatment on major cardiovascular events for individual patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: results from Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation.

Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979)·2014
Same author

Allergies are associated with arterial changes in young children.

European journal of preventive cardiology·2014
Same author

Ramadan fasting and newborn's birth weight in pregnant Muslim women in The Netherlands.

The British journal of nutrition·2014
Same author

Sources of heterogeneity in case-control studies on associations between statins, ACE-inhibitors, and proton pump inhibitors and risk of pneumonia.

European journal of epidemiology·2014
Same author

Quantifying the validity of routine neonatal healthcare data in the Greater Accra Region, Ghana.

PloS one·2014
Same author

The complexity after simplicity: how to proceed with renal denervation in hypertension?

European journal of preventive cardiology·2014
Same journal

Retention Strategies and Participant Retention Rates Among Prospective Longitudinal Pregnancy Cohorts: A Systematic Mapping Review.

Annals of epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Contribution of lifestyle factors to sex differences in educational inequalities in life expectancy in selected European countries.

Annals of epidemiology·2026
Same journal

What remains quantitative in quantitative intersectionality?

Annals of epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Revisiting the role of interaction effects in quantitative intersectionality research.

Annals of epidemiology·2026
Same journal

GLP-1 receptor agonist medications for weight loss: Sociodemographic patterns of awareness, use, and access in a U.S. national cohort.

Annals of epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Even low levels of physical activity are associated with lower all-cause mortality: A cohort study of 594,000 US adults.

Annals of epidemiology·2026
See all related articles

Randomized studies are often unnecessary for evaluating diagnostic test impact on patient outcomes. Combining cross-sectional diagnostic and therapeutic study results can sufficiently assess diagnostic test effectiveness.

Area of Science:

  • Medical research methodology
  • Diagnostic test evaluation
  • Patient outcome assessment

Background:

  • Improving patient outcomes is the primary goal of medical care and diagnostic testing.
  • Quantifying the impact of diagnostic tests on patient outcomes is crucial for establishing their accuracy.
  • Randomized comparisons are a common method for studying patient outcomes in medical research.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To challenge the necessity of randomized studies for evaluating diagnostic test effects on patient outcomes.
  • To propose alternative methods for assessing the impact of diagnostic tests on patient outcomes.
  • To advocate for efficient and valid estimation of diagnostic test influence on patient well-being.

Main Methods:

  • Critically reviewing the role of randomized comparisons in diagnostic research.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analyzing the sufficiency of cross-sectional diagnostic studies.
  • Integrating findings from therapeutic studies with diagnostic study results.

    • Main Results:

    • Randomized studies are frequently not required to accurately estimate a diagnostic test's effect on patient outcomes.
    • Cross-sectional diagnostic studies provide valuable data for outcome assessment.
    • Combining diagnostic and therapeutic study results can offer a valid alternative to randomized trials.

    Conclusions:

    • The necessity of randomized controlled trials for assessing diagnostic test impact on patient outcomes is often overstated.
    • A combination of cross-sectional diagnostic studies and therapeutic study findings can adequately determine the effect of diagnostic tests on patient outcomes.
    • Alternative research designs can efficiently and validly evaluate diagnostic test effectiveness, optimizing resource allocation in medical research.