Skip to main content
PMC home page
Quality & Safety in Health Care logoLink to Quality & Safety in Health Care
. 2003 Jun;12(3):205–209. doi: 10.1136/qhc.12.3.205

About time: diagnostic guidelines that help clinicians

R Foy 1, P Warner 1
PMCID: PMC1743712  PMID: 12792011

Abstract



 Clinical guidelines often make recommendations on the use of diagnostic tests. Compared with sensitivity and specificity, the use of pre- and post-test probabilities allows a more explicit and rational selection and interpretation of diagnostic tests. Ideally, clinical guidelines relating to diagnosis should routinely incorporate this information to enhance individualised decision making. We report our experience of incorporating pre- and post-test probabilities into a guideline on the investigation of women with postmenopausal bleeding developed by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Issues relating to their application are highlighted, including the limitations of available evidence on diagnostic tests and prevalence of disease, acceptability to guideline users, and the uncertain impact on actual clinical decision making. Despite these potential difficulties, the incorporation of data on pre- and post-test probabilities into the development and presentation of guideline recommendations may offer an important opportunity to make clinical decision making more transparent for both clinicians and patients.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (1.3 MB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bero L. A., Grilli R., Grimshaw J. M., Harvey E., Oxman A. D., Thomson M. A. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. The Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group. BMJ. 1998 Aug 15;317(7156):465–468. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7156.465. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cabana M. D., Rand C. S., Powe N. R., Wu A. W., Wilson M. H., Abboud P. A., Rubin H. R. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999 Oct 20;282(15):1458–1465. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.15.1458. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chien P. F., Khan K. S. Evaluation of a clinical test. II: Assessment of validity. BJOG. 2001 Jun;108(6):568–572. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2001.00128.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cluzeau F. A., Littlejohns P., Grimshaw J. M., Feder G., Moran S. E. Development and application of a generic methodology to assess the quality of clinical guidelines. Int J Qual Health Care. 1999 Feb;11(1):21–28. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/11.1.21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gambrell R. D., Jr, Massey F. M., Castaneda T. A., Ugenas A. J., Ricci C. A., Wright J. M. Use of the progestogen challenge test to reduce the risk of endometrial cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1980 Jun;55(6):732–738. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Glasziou P. P., Irwig L. M. An evidence based approach to individualising treatment. BMJ. 1995 Nov 18;311(7016):1356–1359. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7016.1356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Gredmark T., Kvint S., Havel G., Mattsson L. A. Histopathological findings in women with postmenopausal bleeding. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1995 Feb;102(2):133–136. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1995.tb09066.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper. Papers that report diagnostic or screening tests. BMJ. 1997 Aug 30;315(7107):540–543. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7107.540. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Halkin A., Reichman J., Schwaber M., Paltiel O., Brezis M. Likelihood ratios: getting diagnostic testing into perspective. QJM. 1998 Apr;91(4):247–258. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/91.4.247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Jackson R. Guidelines on preventing cardiovascular disease in clinical practice. BMJ. 2000 Mar 11;320(7236):659–661. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7236.659. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jaeschke R., Guyatt G. H., Sackett D. L. Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1994 Mar 2;271(9):703–707. doi: 10.1001/jama.271.9.703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Johnson M. R., Good C. D., Penny W. D., Barnes P. R., Scadding J. W. Lesson of the week: Playing the odds in clinical decision making: lessons from berry aneurysms undetected by magnetic resonance angiography. BMJ. 2001 Jun 2;322(7298):1347–1349. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7298.1347. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lidor A., Ismajovich B., Confino E., David M. P. Histopathological findings in 226 women with post-menopausal uterine bleeding. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1986;65(1):41–43. doi: 10.3109/00016348609158227. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lijmer J. G., Mol B. W., Heisterkamp S., Bonsel G. J., Prins M. H., van der Meulen J. H., Bossuyt P. M. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA. 1999 Sep 15;282(11):1061–1066. doi: 10.1001/jama.282.11.1061. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Persson I., Adami H. O., Bergkvist L., Lindgren A., Pettersson B., Hoover R., Schairer C. Risk of endometrial cancer after treatment with oestrogens alone or in conjunction with progestogens: results of a prospective study. BMJ. 1989 Jan 21;298(6667):147–151. doi: 10.1136/bmj.298.6667.147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Poses R. M., Cebul R. D., Wigton R. S. You can lead a horse to water--improving physicians' knowledge of probabilities may not affect their decisions. Med Decis Making. 1995 Jan-Mar;15(1):65–75. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9501500110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Sackett D. L., Haynes R. B. The architecture of diagnostic research. BMJ. 2002 Mar 2;324(7336):539–541. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7336.539. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Shekelle P. G., Kravitz R. L., Beart J., Marger M., Wang M., Lee M. Are nonspecific practice guidelines potentially harmful? A randomized comparison of the effect of nonspecific versus specific guidelines on physician decision making. Health Serv Res. 2000 Mar;34(7):1429–1448. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Smith-Bindman R., Kerlikowske K., Feldstein V. A., Subak L., Scheidler J., Segal M., Brand R., Grady D. Endovaginal ultrasound to exclude endometrial cancer and other endometrial abnormalities. JAMA. 1998 Nov 4;280(17):1510–1517. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.17.1510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Steurer Johann, Fischer Joachim E., Bachmann Lucas M., Koller Michael, ter Riet Gerben. Communicating accuracy of tests to general practitioners: a controlled study. BMJ. 2002 Apr 6;324(7341):824–826. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7341.824. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Summerton N. Diagnosis and general practice. Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Dec;50(461):995–1000. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Symonds I. Ultrasound, hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy in the investigation of endometrial cancer. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2001 Jun;15(3):381–391. doi: 10.1053/beog.2000.0183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Quality & safety in health care are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES