Authors: A D Bai A Showler L Burry M Steinberg G A Tomlinson C M Bell A M Morris
Publish Date: 2016/06/29
Volume: 35, Issue: 9, Pages: 1393-1398
Abstract
Infectious diseases specialists often use diagnostic tests to assess the probability of a disease based on knowledge of the diagnostic properties It has become standard for published studies on diagnostic tests to report sensitivity specificity and predictive values Likelihood ratios are often omitted We compared published clinical prediction rules in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia to illustrate the importance of likelihood ratios We performed a narrative review comparing published clinical prediction rules used for excluding endocarditis in S aureus bacteremia Of nine published clinical prediction rules only three studies reported likelihood ratios Many studies concluded that the clinical prediction rule could safely exclude endocarditis based on high sensitivity and high negative predictive value Of the studies with similar high sensitivity and high negative predictive value calculated negative likelihood ratios were able to differentiate and identify the best clinical prediction rule for excluding endocarditis Compared to sensitivity specificity and predictive values likelihood ratios can be more directly used to interpret diagnostic test results to assist in ruling in or ruling out a disease Therefore a new standard should be set to include likelihood ratios in reporting of diagnostic tests in infectious diseases researchThis study was carried out as part of our routine work The Sinai Health SystemUniversity Health Network Antimicrobial Stewardship Program was supported by an unrestricted educational grant from Pfizer Canada until 2012 which partially supported the employment of a research coordinator M Steinberg A Morris receives partial salary support for his antimicrobial stewardship activities from Mount Sinai Hospital and University Health Network A CIHR/CPSI Chair in Patient Safety and Continuity of Care supports C Bell
Keywords: