Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Elliot, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Reuler, J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Elliot, D. L.
Right arrow Articles by Reuler, J. B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Management of Suspected Temporal Arteritis

A Decision Analysis

Diane L. Elliot

William J. Watts

James B. Reuler

Management strategies for suspected temporal arteritis range from bilateral temporal artery biopsy to empiric corticosteroid therapy. A decision analysis of the clinical situation was constructed, and a sensitivity analysis for varying prevalences of temporal arteritis was used to calculate costs for different management strategies. Conclusions suggested by the analysis include the following: (1) due to the high cost of blindness, suspicion of disease must be low (< 1.4070) not to biopsy; (2) at high suspicion of disease (> 30Vo), empiric steroids are the cheapest management; (3) when diagnostic procedures are indicated, bilateral biopsy is the cheapest initial diagnostic procedure; and (4) if unilateral biopsy is negative, a second biopsy is always cost effective. (Med Decis Making 3:63-68, 1983).

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 3, No. 1, 63-68 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8300300112
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Arch NeurolHome page
C. D. Koprowski, W. T. Longstreth Jr, and R. D. Cebul
Clinical Neuroepidemiology: III. Decisions
Arch Neurol, February 1, 1989; 46(2): 223 - 229.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
J. P. KASSIRER, A. J. MOSKOWITZ, J. LAU, and S. G. PAUKER
Decision Analysis: A Progress Report
Ann Intern Med, February 1, 1987; 106(2): 275 - 291.
[Abstract] [PDF]