Cited by 105Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyReliability and Agreement in Measurement

Value of composite reference standards in diagnostic research

Open access
Naaktgeboren, C. A., Bertens, L. C. M., Smeden, M. v., Groot, J. A. H. d., Moons, K. G. M., Reitsma, J. B.·2013·BMJ

Abstract

Combining several tests is a common way to improve the final classification of disease status in diagnostic accuracy studies but is often used ambiguously. This article gives advice on proper use and reporting of composite reference standards

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.f5605

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [3]3. Alonzo TA, Pepe MS. Using a combination of reference tests to assess the accuracy of a new diagnostic test. Stat Med 1999;18:2987-3003.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Naaktgeboren, C. A., Bertens, L. C. M., Smeden, M. V., Groot, J. A. H. D., Moons, K. G. M., & Reitsma, J. B.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Corresponding author
Naaktgeboren, C. A.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2013-10-25
Volume
347
Issue
oct25 2
Pages
f5605-f5605
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025991594
Cited by
105
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 4
FWCI
7.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
composite reference standard, diagnostic accuracy, disease classification, test combination, reporting guidelines
MeSH terms
Diagnostic Errors, Reference Standards, Research Design, Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures, Research Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review