This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0272989X08323620v1 29/1/116    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Bianchi, M. T. Articles by Cash, S. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bianchi, M. T. Articles by Cash, S. S. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Health Screening Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Incorporating Uncertainty Into Medical Decision Making: An Approach to Unexpected Test Results

Partners Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Wang Ambulatory Center, Boston, Massachusetts, thebianchi{at}gmail.com

Brian M. Alexander, MD, MPH

Harvard Radiation Oncology Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Beth Israel Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts

Sydney S. Cash, MD, PhD

Partners Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Wang Ambulatory Center, Boston, Massachusetts

The utility of diagnostic tests derives from the ability to translate the population concepts of sensitivity and specificity into information that will be useful for the individual patient: the predictive value of the result. As the array of available diagnostic testing broadens, there is a temptation to de-emphasize history and physical findings and defer to the objective rigor of technology. However, diagnostic test interpretation is not always straightforward. One significant barrier to routine use of probability-based test interpretation is the uncertainty inherent in pretest probability estimation, the critical first step of Bayesian reasoning. The context in which this uncertainty presents the greatest challenge is when test results oppose clinical judgment. It is this situation when decision support would be most helpful. The authors propose a simple graphical approach that incorporates uncertainty in pretest probability and has specific application to the interpretation of unexpected results. This method quantitatively demonstrates how uncertainty in disease probability may be amplified when test results are unexpected (opposing clinical judgment), even for tests with high sensitivity and specificity. The authors provide a simple nomogram for determining whether an unexpected test result suggests that one should ``switch diagnostic sides.'' This graphical framework overcomes the limitation of pretest probability uncertainty in Bayesian analysis and guides decision making when it is most challenging: interpretation of unexpected test results.

Key Words: Key words: pretest probability • uncertainty • Bayes • unexpected • decision theory. (Med Decis Making 2009;29:116—124)

This version was published on January 1, 2009

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 29, No. 1, 116-124 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08323620


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. Soreide Sensitivity and specificity in diagnostic accuracy: ROC solid or lost in translation? J. Clin. Pathol., November 1, 2009; 62(11): 1051 - 1052. [Full Text] [PDF]