Skip to main content

Table 2 Measures of test accuracy reported in review of diagnostic literature (1994–2000)

From: Reporting of measures of accuracy in systematic reviews of diagnostic literature

  Time periods  
Measures of test accuracy 1994–1997 1998–2000  
  n % (95% confidence interval) + n % (95% confidence interval + p-value **
Included primary studies 50 *   40 *   
Sensitivity or specificity 35 70 (55–82) 30a 75 (59–87) 0.77
Predictive values 13b 26 (15–40) 13c 33 (19–49) 0.66
Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values 12 24 (13–38) 12 30 (17–47) 0.69
Likelihood ratios 9 18(9–31) 11 28 (15–44) 0.41
Diagnostic odds ratios 0 0 (0–7) 0 (0–9) -
Meta-analysis 38 * 76(62–87) 22 * 55 (38–71) 0.16
Independently pooled sensitivity or specificity 22 58 (41–74) 13d 62 (36–79) 0.86
Pooled predictive values 9e 24(11–40) 2f 10(1–29) 0.29
Pooled likelihood ratios 5 13 (4–28) 8 38 (17–59) 0.08
Pooled diagnostic odds ratios 5 13 (4–28) 0 0(0–15) 0.20
Summary ROC plot or values 23 61 (43–76) 11 52 (28–72) 0.60
  1. * numbers do not add up to totals because some reviews used more than one measures of accuracy; ** chi sq. test with Yates' correction; + Exact (Clopper-Pearson) 95% confidence interval a includes study that only reported either sensitivity or specificity; b,c. includes study that only reported either positive or negative predictive value; d includes meta-analyses that only reported either pooled sensitivity or specificity; e,f. includes meta-analyses that only reported either pooled positive or negative predictive values