IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v9y1989i2p91-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Threshold Analysis Using Diagnostic Tests with Multiple Results

Author

Listed:
  • Robert F. Nease
  • Douglas K. Owens
  • Harold C. Sox

Abstract

Clinical problems represented by decision trees can be analyzed in terms of the probability threshold model, which provides management recommendations based on the prior prob ability of disease, the test threshold, and the test-treatment threshold. As originally proposed, the threshold model assumes that diagnostic tests provide information about a single event that is relevant to the decision. For some problems, however, a diagnostic test may provide information about more than one such event (e.g., a computed tomography [CT] scan gives information about both mediastinal and hilar metastases in lung cancer). The authors extend the probability threshold model to cases in which a single test provides information about two events that are relevant to the decision. They derive four thresholds that determine the best strategy for any combination of test results. The approach is illustrated for the decision to use a CT scan to stage lung cancer. The analysis reveals that: 1) the range of prior probabilities for which testing is optimal increases; 2) for some prior probabilities only test results about one event are important; 3) for some prior probabilities test results about both events are important; and 4) failure to account fully for information provided by a test can lead to erroneous test and treatment recommendations. Key words: decision theory; Bayes theorem; decision making, computer-assisted; decision support technics; predictive value of tests; lung neoplasms; probability threshold; decision analysis. (Med Decis Making 1989;9:91- 103)

Suggested Citation

  • Robert F. Nease & Douglas K. Owens & Harold C. Sox, 1989. "Threshold Analysis Using Diagnostic Tests with Multiple Results," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(2), pages 91-103, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:9:y:1989:i:2:p:91-103
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8900900204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X8900900204
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X8900900204?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:9:y:1989:i:2:p:91-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.