The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A guide to aid the selection of diagnostic tests
Open accessAbstract
In recent years, a wide range of diagnostic tests has become available for use in resource-constrained settings. Accordingly, a huge number of guidelines, performance evaluations and implementation reports have been produced. However, this wealth of information is unstructured and of uneven quality, which has made it difficult for end-users, such as clinics, laboratories and health ministries, to determine which test would be best for improving clinical care and patient outcomes in a specific context. This paper outlines a six-step guide to the selection and implementation of in vitro diagnostic tests based on Médecins Sans Frontières' practical experience: (i) define the test's purpose; (ii) review the market; (iii) ascertain regulatory approval; (iv) determine the test's diagnostic accuracy under ideal conditions; (v) determine the test's diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice; and (vi) monitor the test's performance in routine use. Gaps in the information needed to complete these six steps and gaps in regulatory systems are highlighted. Finally, ways of improving the quality of diagnostic tests are suggested, such as establishing a model list of essential diagnostics, establishing a repository of information on the design of diagnostic studies and improving quality control and postmarketing surveillance.
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
Thresholds for the cost–effectiveness of interventions: alternative approaches
Marseille, E., Larson, B., Kazi, D. S., Kahn, J. G., & Rosen, S. (2015) · Bulletin of the World Health Organization · doi:10.2471/blt.14.138206 · Cited by 851
The Value of In Vitro Diagnostic Testing in Medical Practice: A Status Report
Rohr, U.-P., Binder, C., Dieterle, T., Giusti, F., Messina, C. G. M., Toerien, E., Moch, H., & Schäfer, H. H. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0149856 · Cited by 229
Korevaar, D. A., van Enst, W. A., Spijker, R., Bossuyt, P. M. M., & Hooft, L. (2014) · Evidence Based Medicine · doi:10.1136/eb-2013-101637 · Cited by 119
Diagnostics for Developing Countries
McNerney, R. (2015) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics5020200 · Cited by 111
Cited by
Microfluidic Paper-Based Analytical Devices: From Design to Applications
Noviana, E., Ozer, T., Carrell, C. S., Link, J. S., McMahon, C., Jang, I., & Henry, C. S. (2021) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01335 · Cited by 631
McConnell, E. M., Cozma, I., Mou, Q., Brennan, J. D., Lu, Y., & Li, Y. (2021) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/d1cs00240f · Cited by 477
Jain, S., Nehra, M., Kumar, R., Dilbaghi, N., Hu, T., Kumar, S., Kaushik, A., & Li, C.-Z. (2021) · Biosensors and Bioelectronics · doi:10.1016/j.bios.2021.113074 · Cited by 357
Tuberculosis and COVID-19 interaction: A review of biological, clinical and public health effects
Visca, D., Ong, C. W. M., Tiberi, S., Centis, R., D’Ambrosio, L., Chen, B., Mueller, J., Mueller, P., Duarte, R., Dalcolmo, M., et al. (2021) · Pulmonology · doi:10.1016/j.pulmoe.2020.12.012 · Cited by 328
Metadata
- Authors
- Kosack, C. S., Page, A.-L., & Klatser, P. R.
- Venue
- Bulletin of the World Health Organization
- Publisher
- WHO Press
- Published
- 2017-06-26
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 639-645
- ISSN
- 0042-9686 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2751808856
- Cited by
- 415
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 19.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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: A guide to aid the selection of diagnostic tests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2471/blt.16.187468
- The paper
- Kosack, C. S., Page, A.-L., & Klatser, P. R. (2017). A guide to aid the selection of diagnostic tests. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. https://doi.org/10.2471/blt.16.187468
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.