Innovative perspectives on the value of diagnostic tests in clinical practice

  • Estrada-Orozco Kelly a. Clinical Epidemiology doctoral program, Clinical epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Bogotá, Colombia. b. Evidence Synthesis and Technology Management Unit, Health Technology Evaluation Institute (IETS). Bogotá, Colombia. c. Clinical Research Institute, Facultad de Medicina, Fundación Universitaria Sanitas. Bogotá, Colombia.
  • Juliana Cuervo Clinical Epidemiology doctoral program, Clinical epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Bogotá, Colombia.
Keywords: Diagnosis, Diagnostic test, Clinical value, Sensitivity and specificity, Clinical practice


Diagnostic tests have intrinsic characteristics such as sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy and likelihood ratios which define their operational performance. It is not uncommon to find in the literature that test value and clinical utility are defined based exclusively on those characteristics. This paper introduces several arguments aimed at prompting a reflection regarding the characteristics that define the true value of diagnostic tests in clinical practice.  It concludes with the view that the value of each diagnostic test needs to be established in accordance with the circumstances in which it is used, taking into account extrinsic characteristics such as in whom it is used, when, where and by who.


Bolboacă SD. Medical Diagnostic Tests: A review of test anatomy, phases, and statistical treatment of data. Comput Math Methods Med. 2019;1891569. doi:

Schünemann HJ, Mustafá RA, Brozek J, Steingart KR, Leeflang M, Murad MH, et al. GRADE guidelines: 21 part 1. Study design, risk of bias, and indirectness in rating the certainty across a body of evidence for test accuracy. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;122:129-41. doi:

Šimundić AM. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: Basic definitions. EJIFCC. 2009;19(4):203-11.

Shreffler JHM. Diagnostic testing accuracy: Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios. StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 [cited 16 Jan 2024]. Available at:

Wong HB. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV. Proceed Singapore Healthc. 2001;20(4):316-8. doi:

Pluddemann A BA, O’Sullivan J. Spectrum bias: Sackett Catalogue Of Bias [internet]. 2019 [cited 16 Jan 2024]. Available at:

Buehler AM, Ascef BdO, Oliveira HAd, Ferri CP, Fernandes JG. Rational use of diagnostic tests for clinical decision making. Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. 2019;65. doi:

Schünemann HJ, Mustafá RA, Brozek J, Santesso N, Bossuyt PM, Steingart KR, et al. GRADE guidelines: 22. The GRADE approach for tests and strategies-from test accuracy to patient-important outcomes and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;111:69-82. doi:

Definición de Intrínseco [internet]. 2024 [cited 16 Jan 2024]. Available at:

Habibzadeh F, Yadollahie M. Number needed to misdiagnose: a measure of diagnostic test effectiveness. Epidemiology. 2013;24(1):170. doi:

Mitchell AJ. The clinical significance of subjective memory complaints in the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and dementia: a meta-analysis. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2008;23(11):1191-202. doi:

Mitchell AJ. Sensitivity × PPV is a recognized test called the clinical utility index (CUI+). Eur J Epidemiol. 2011;26(3):251-2. doi:

Santé. Autotest VIH France [internet]. 2024 [cited 16 Jan 2024]. Available at:

Ministerio de Salud y de Protección Social. Guía de práctica clínica basada en la evidencia para la atención de la infección por VIH/SIDA en personas adultas, gestantes y adolescentes. Colombia: Minsalud; 2022.

Josephson CB, White PM, Krishan A, Al-Shahi Salman R. Computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography for detection of intracranial vascular malformations in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;2014(9):Cd009372. doi:

Linden A. Measuring diagnostic and predictive accuracy in disease management: an introduction to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006;12(2):132-9. doi:

Leeflang MM, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Hooft L, Bossuyt PM. Variation of a test's sensitivity and specificity with disease prevalence. CMAJ. 2013;185(11):E537-44. doi:

Mulherin SA, Miller WC. Spectrum bias or spectrum effect? Subgroup variation in diagnostic test evaluation. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(7):598-602. doi:

Feinstein AR. Misguided efforts and future challenges for research on "diagnostic tests". J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56(5):330-2. doi:

Brenner H, Gefeller O. Variation of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values with disease prevalence. Stat Med. 1997;16(9):981-91. doi:<981::aid-sim510>;2-n.

Leeflang MM, Bossuyt PM, Irwig L. Diagnostic test accuracy may vary with prevalence: implications for evidence-based diagnosis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(1):5-12. doi:

Hultcrantz M, Mustafá RA, Leeflang MMG, Lavergne V, Estrada-Orozco K, Ansari MT, et al. Defining ranges for certainty ratings of diagnostic accuracy: a GRADE concept paper. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;117:138-48. doi:

Jang TB, Ruggeri W, Kaji AH. The predictive value of specific emergency sonographic signs for cholecystitis. J Med Ultras. 2013;21(1):29-31. doi:

Zarate AJ. ÁM, King, I, Torrealba. A. Colecistitis aguda. Universidad Finis Terrae: Escuela de Medicina 2016;7.

Halpin V. Acute cholecystitis. BMJ Clin Evid. 2014;2014.

Gelaye B, Tadesse MG, Williams MA, Fann JR, Vander Stoep A, Andrew Zhou X-H. Assessing validity of a depression screening instrument in the absence of a gold standard. Ann Epidemiol. 2014;24(7):527-31. doi:

Davison TE, McCabe MP, Mellor D. An examination of the "gold standard" diagnosis of major depression in aged-care settings. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009;17(5):359-67. doi:

Wood SJ, Yung AR. Diagnostic markers for schizophrenia: do we actually know what we're looking for? World Psychiatry. 2011;10(1):33-4. doi:

van Os J, Tamminga C. Deconstructing psychosis. Schizophr Bull. 2007;33(4):861-2. doi:

Estrada-Orozco K. Diseño de una prueba para diagnóstico de trastorno cognitivo y validación en una cohorte de sujetos mayores de 50 años en Colombia en el 2016-2017. Bogotá, D.C: Universidad Nacional de Colombia; 2018.

Pietrzak K, Czarnecka K, Mikiciuk-Olasik E, Szymanski P. New perspectives of alzheimer disease diagnosis - the most popular and future methods. Med Chem. 2018;14(1):34-43. doi:

Bossuyt PM, Irwig L, Craig J, Glasziou P. Comparative accuracy: assessing new tests against existing diagnostic pathways. BMJ (Clinical research ed). 2006;332(7549):1089-92. doi:

Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Di Nisio M, Smidt N, van Rijn JC, Bossuyt PM. Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies. CMAJ. 2006;174(4):469-76. doi:

Mathes T, Pieper D. An algorithm for the classification of study designs to assess diagnostic, prognostic and predictive test accuracy in systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews. 2019;8(1):226. doi:

Schmidt RL, Factor RE. Understanding sources of bias in diagnostic accuracy studies. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137(4):558-65. doi:

Whiting P, Rutjes A, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: A revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):529-36. doi:

Bartlett JW, Frost C. Reliability, repeatability and reproducibility: analysis of measurement errors in continuous variables. Ultr Obstet Gynecol. 2008;31(4):466-75. doi:

Mahajan A, Manchikanti L. Value and validity of coronavirus antibody testing. Pain Physician. 2020;23(4s):S381-s90. doi:

Mercado M, Malagón-Rojas J, Delgado G, Rubio VV, Muñoz Galindo L, Parra Barrera EL, et al. Evaluation of nine serological rapid tests for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Rev Panam Salud Pública. 2020;44:e149. doi:

Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, Takwoingi Y, Davenport C, Spijker R, Taylor-Phillips S, et al. Antibody tests for identification of current and past infection with SARS‐CoV‐2. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020(6). doi:

Veiga S, Rodríguez-Martín A, García-Ribas G, Arribas I, Menacho-Román M, Calero M. Validation of a novel and accurate ApoE4 assay for automated chemistry analyzers. Scientific Reports. 2020;10(1):2138. doi:

Atkins ER, Panegyres PK. The clinical utility of gene testing for Alzheimer's disease. Neurol Int. 2011;3(1):e1-e. doi:

Bertram L, Tanzi RE. Genome-wide association studies in Alzheimer's disease. Hum Mol Genet. 2009;18(R2):R137-45. doi:

Kortela E, Kirjavainen V, Ahava MJ, Jokiranta ST, But A, Lindahl A, et al. Real-life clinical sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test in symptomatic patients. PloS One. 2021;16(5):e0251661-e. doi:

Peeling RW, Olliaro PL, Boeras DI, Fongwen N. Scaling up COVID-19 rapid antigen tests: promises and challenges. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2021;21(9):E290-5. doi:

World Health Organization. WHO provides one million antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic test kits to accelerate COVID-19 testing in Indonesia. World Health Organization [internet]. 2021 [cited 16 Jan 2024]. Available at:

How to Cite
Kelly E-O, Cuervo J. Innovative perspectives on the value of diagnostic tests in clinical practice. Colomb. J. Anesthesiol. [Internet]. 2024 Apr. 2 [cited 2024 Jul. 25];52(3). Available from:


Download data is not yet available.
How to Cite
Kelly E-O, Cuervo J. Innovative perspectives on the value of diagnostic tests in clinical practice. Colomb. J. Anesthesiol. [Internet]. 2024 Apr. 2 [cited 2024 Jul. 25];52(3). Available from:


Article metrics
Abstract views
Galley vies
PDF Views
HTML views
Other views
QR Code

Some similar items: