The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The interpretation of diagnostic tests
Abstract
Laboratory diagnostic tests are central in the practice of modern medicine. Common uses include screening a specific population for evidence of disease and confirming or ruling out a tentative diagnosis in an individual patient. The interpretation of a diagnostic test result depends on both the ability of the test to distinguish diseased from nondiseased subjects and the particular characteristics of the patient and setting in which the test is being used. This article reviews statistical methodology for assessing laboratory diagnostic test accuracy and interpreting individual test results, with an emphasis on diagnostic tests that yield a continuous measurement. The article begins with a summary of basic concepts and terminology, then briefly discusses study design and reviews methods for assessing the accuracy of a single diagnostic test, comparing the accuracy of two or more diagnostic tests and interpreting individual test results.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
DeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M., & Clarke-Pearson, D. L. (1988) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531595 · Cited by 22,649
Measuring agreement in method comparison studies
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/096228029900800204 · Cited by 9,619
Measuring agreement in method comparison studies
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1999) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1191/096228099673819272 · Cited by 9,619
Likelihood ratios with confidence: Sample size estimation for diagnostic test studies
Simel, D. L., Samsa, G. P., & Matchar, D. B. (1991) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/0895-4356(91)90128-v · Cited by 932
Cited by
Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for evaluating diagnostic tests and predictive models
Zou, K. H., O’Malley, A. J., & Mauri, L. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.105.594929 · Cited by 1,473
Jiménez‐Valverde, A. (2012) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2011.00683.x · Cited by 803
Bliese, P. D., Wright, K. M., Adler, A. B., Cabrera, O., Castro, C. A., & Hoge, C. W. (2008) · Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.76.2.272 · Cited by 733
Classification of osteoarthritis biomarkers: a proposed approach
Bauer, D. C., Hunter, D. J., Abramson, S. B., Attur, M., Corr, M., Felson, D., Heinegård, D., Jordan, J. M., Kepler, T. B., Lane, N. E., et al. (2006) · Osteoarthritis and Cartilage · doi:10.1016/j.joca.2006.04.001 · Cited by 405
Leeflang, M. M. G., Moons, K. G. M., Reitsma, J. B., & Zwinderman, A. H. (2008) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2007.096032 · Cited by 346
Metadata
- Authors
- Shapiro, D. E.
- Venue
- Statistical Methods in Medical Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-04
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 113-134
- ISSN
- 0962-2802 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0334
- OpenAlex
- W2066772169
- Cited by
- 383
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 8.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The interpretation of diagnostic tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/096228029900800203
- The paper
- Shapiro, D. E. (1999). The interpretation of diagnostic tests. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/096228029900800203
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
