The Fagan's nomogram. The Fagan's nomogram. For example: the MRI screening test for breast cancer in high-risk female patients has an estimated diagnostic.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Likelihood ratios Why these are the most thrilling statistics in Emergency Medicine.
Advertisements

Lecture 3 Validity of screening and diagnostic tests
Critically Evaluating the Evidence: diagnosis, prognosis, and screening Elizabeth Crabtree, MPH, PhD (c) Director of Evidence-Based Practice, Quality Management.
Processing physical evidence discovering, recognizing and examining it; collecting, recording and identifying it; packaging, conveying and storing it;
Diagnostics in EM; test thresholds and likelihood ratios Published courtesy of the CEM FOAMed Network
(Medical) Diagnostic Testing. The situation Patient presents with symptoms, and is suspected of having some disease. Patient either has the disease or.
Diagnosis Concepts and Glossary. Cross-sectional study The observation of a defined population at a single point in time or time interval. Exposure and.
Statistics in Screening/Diagnosis
DEB BYNUM, MD AUGUST 2010 Evidence Based Medicine: Review of the basics.
Diagnostic Cases. Goals & Objectives Highlight Bayesian and Boolean processes used in classic diagnosis Demonstrate use/misuse of tests for screening.
Statistics for nMRCGP Jo Kirkcaldy. Curriculum Condensed Knowledge Incidence and prevalence Specificity and sensitivity Positive and negative predictive.
Evidence Based Medicine Workshop Diagnosis March 18, 2010.
Diagnosis: EBM Approach Michael Brown MD Grand Rapids MERC/ Michigan State University.
Evaluating Diagnostic Tests Payam Kabiri, MD. PhD. Clinical Epidemiologist Tehran University of Medical Sciences.
Likelihood 2005/5/22. Likelihood  probability I am likelihood I am probability.
Evidence-Based Medicine Diagnosis Component 2 / Unit 5 1 Health IT Workforce Curriculum Version 1.0 /Fall 2010.
Stats Facts Mark Halloran. Diagnostic Stats Disease present Disease absent TOTALS Test positive aba+b Test negative cdc+d TOTALSa+cb+da+b+c+d.
Statistics for the board September 14 th 2007 Jean-Sebastien Rachoin MD.
Evaluating Screening Programs Dr. Jørn Olsen Epi 200B January 19, 2010.
Positive Predictive Value and Negative Predictive Value
Predictive values prevalence CK and acute myocardial infarction –sensitivity 70% –specificity 80% –prevalence - 40% –prevalence - 20% –PPV and NPV.
Unit 15: Screening. Unit 15 Learning Objectives: 1.Understand the role of screening in the secondary prevention of disease. 2.Recognize the characteristics.
Diagnostic Test Characteristics: What does this result mean
/ 101 Saudi Diploma in Family Medicine Center of Post Graduate Studies in Family Medicine EBM Diagnostic Tests Dr. Zekeriya Aktürk
EBM --- Journal Reading Presenter :傅斯誠 Date : 2005/10/26.
Diagnosis Examination(MMSE) in detecting dementia among elderly patients living in the community. Excel.
Diagnostic Likelihood Ratio Presented by Juan Wang.
Diagnosis:Testing the Test Verma Walker Kathy Davies.
© 2010 Jones and Bartlett Publishers, LLC. Chapter 12 Clinical Epidemiology.
Date of download: 7/1/2016 From: A Quantitative Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Test for Colorectal Neoplasia Ann Intern Med. 2007;146(4): doi: /
Screening Tests: A Review. Learning Objectives: 1.Understand the role of screening in the secondary prevention of disease. 2.Recognize the characteristics.
Date of download: 7/11/2016 From: Laboratory Evaluation in the Diagnosis of Lyme Disease Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(12): doi: /
Diagnostic studies Adrian Boyle.
A pooled analysis of MRI in the detection of bone marrow infiltration in patients with malignant lymphoma  X.-X. Jiang, Z.-X. Yan, Y.-Y. Song, W.-L. Zhao 
Copyright © American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Evidence-Based Medicine
How many study subjects are required ? (Estimation of Sample size) By Dr.Shaik Shaffi Ahamed Associate Professor Dept. of Family & Community Medicine.
Publishing Nutrition Research: Validity, Reliability, and Diagnostic Test Assessment in Nutrition-Related Research  Philip M. Gleason, PhD, Jeffrey Harris,
Figure 1. Overall survival of patients receiving alternative medicine (solid lines) vs conventional cancer treatment (dashed lines). Overall survival of.
Dr. Tauseef Ismail Assistant Professor Dept of C Med. KGMC
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Clinical Epidemiology
How do we judge efficacy of a screening test?
Diagnosis II Dr. Brent E. Faught, Ph.D. Assistant Professor
سرطان الثدي Breast Cancer
Refining Probability Test Informations Vahid Ashoorion MD. ,MSc,
بعض النقاط التي تؤخذ في الحسبان عند تقييم الاستثمارات الزراعية
COUNTERPOINT: Should BAL Be Routinely Performed in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis? No  Joshua J. Mooney, MD, Harold R. Collard,
کارگاه تکميلی کشوری تربيت مربی آموزش طب مبتنی بر شواهد
Publishing Nutrition Research: Validity, Reliability, and Diagnostic Test Assessment in Nutrition-Related Research  Philip M. Gleason, PhD, Jeffrey Harris,
DSM-IV delirium prevalence, including the estimated delirium prevalence in the 31 patients that did not undergo delirium assessment following initial screening.
Vancouver Risk Calculator Compared with ACR Lung-RADS in Predicting Malignancy: Analysis of the National Lung Screening Trial   When using CT to screen.
The proposed new evidence-based medicine pyramid.
TUCAN (CARD8) Genetic Variants and Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Meta-analytical probability modifying plot, illustrating the relationship between pretest probability of psychosis onset 38 months and post-test probability.
J. A. Castilla, S. Zamora, M. C. Gonzalvo, J. D. Luna del Castillo, J
Accuracy of sputum colour in predicting NB
Computation of Post Test Probability
Two way sensitivity analyses of the sensitivity and specificity of HSV-2 type specific ELISA. Each line represents a different estimate of ELISA specificity.
 A nomogram of Bayes for applying positive and negative likelihood ratios calculated for selected ranges of values of procalcitonin (PCT) and C reactive.
Sensitivity and specificity plots of human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) (A and B, respectively) and carbohydrate antigen 125 (CA-125) (C and D, respectively)
Meta-analysis of risk ratios for percentage of patients who developed catheter-associated urinary tract infection, for intervention versus control groups,
The two-step Fagan's nomogram.
Meta-analysis of risk ratios for percentage of patients who developed catheter-associated urinary tract infection, for intervention versus control groups,
Family studies of bipolar disorder.
Relative risk of suffering clinically measurable levels of general anxiety and depression following a false-positive mammogram compared to a normal mammogram,
Accuracy of sputum colour in predicting neutrophilic inflammation.
Evidence Based Diagnosis
Size of the four key populations at risk: (1) male clients of female sex workers (MCFSW), (2) men who have sex with men (MSM), (3) female sex worker (FSW)
Predicting Axillary Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Breast MRI and US in Patients with Node-Positive Breast Cancer An imaging-based predictive model.
Causation is defined by a different risk in the entire population under two potential exposure values; association is defined by a different risk in the.
Presentation transcript:

The Fagan's nomogram. The Fagan's nomogram. For example: the MRI screening test for breast cancer in high-risk female patients has an estimated diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) of 75% and specificity (DSp) of 96%.11 It is first necessary to calculate separately the likelihood ratio of positive and negative test results (LR+ and LR−, respectively) using conventional formulae (LR+ = DSe/(1−DSp) and LR− = (1−DSe)/DSp). Given that the patient came from a high-risk population with an estimated prevalence of 2%, if this patient tests positive, the post-test probability that she truly has cancer would be approximately 28% (red line). Alternatively, if the patient tests negative, the post-test probability that she truly has cancer would be approximately 0.6% (blue line). Charles G B Caraguel, and Raphaël Vanderstichel Evid Based Med 2013;18:125-128 ©2013 by BMJ Publishing Group Ltd