Strategies for improving power in diagnostic radiology research.

Beam, Craig A.

doi:10.2214/ajr.159.3.1503041

Cited by 54 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sample size was calculated as 203 people examined. 15,16 Given a population prevalence of PsA in people with psoriasis of 15-40% it was estimated that a total of up to 1360 people would have to be screened to give sufficient positive responders for this study. For people examined, results are given by number with true positive, false positive, true negative and false negative test results.…”

Section: Sample Size and Statistical Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of three screening tools to detect psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis (CONTEST study)

Coates¹,

Aslam²,

Balushi³

et al. 2013

British Journal of Dermatology

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryBackground Multiple questionnaires to screen for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have been developed but the optimal screening questionnaire is unknown. Objectives To compare three PsA screening questionnaires in a head-to-head study using CASPAR (the Classification Criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis) as the gold standard. Methods This study recruited from 10 U.K. secondary care dermatology clinics. Patients with a diagnosis of psoriasis, not previously diagnosed with PsA, were given all three questionnaires. All patients who were positive on any questionnaire were invited for a rheumatological assessment. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare the sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve of the three questionnaires according to CASPAR criteria. Results In total, 938 patients with psoriasis were invited to participate and 657 (70%) patients returned the questionnaires. One or more questionnaires were positive in 314 patients (48%) and 195 (62%) of these patients attended for assessment. Of these, 47 patients (24%) were diagnosed with PsA according to the CASPAR criteria. The proportion of patients with PsA increased with the number of positive questionnaires (one questionnaire, 19AE1%; two, 34AE0%; three, 46AE8%). Sensitivities and specificities for the three questionnaires, and areas under the ROC curve were, respectively: Psoriatic Arthritis Screening Evaluation (PASE), 74AE5%, 38AE5%, 0AE594; Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST), 76AE6%, 37AE2%, 0AE610; Toronto Psoriatic Arthritis Screen (ToPAS), 76AE6%, 29AE7%, 0AE554. The majority of patients with a false positive response had degenerative or osteoarthritis. Conclusion Although the PEST and ToPAS questionnaires performed slightly better than the PASE questionnaire at identifying PsA, there is little difference between these instruments. These screening tools identify many cases of musculoskeletal disease other than PsA.

show abstract

Section: Sample Size and Statistical Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of three screening tools to detect psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis (CONTEST study)

Coates¹,

Aslam²,

Balushi³

et al. 2013

British Journal of Dermatology

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…19 Sample size calculations can also be performed using this method (Appendix 1). [19][20][21][22] Calculations used a paired-study design (single-lead electrocardiogram and blood pressure device compared separately with pulse-check) with a 2-sided α of 0.025 for multiple compari-…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic accuracy and yield of screening tests for atrial fibrillation in the family practice setting: a multicentre cohort study

Quinn

Gladstone

Ivers

et al. 2018

cmajo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The correct sample size was estimated following a method for paired diagnostic tests (27,28). The probable difference in the sensitivity and the specificity between the two assays was assumed based on a previous meta-analysis (14), and an 80% power was chosen to identify the disagreement.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective evaluation of fluorescence in situ hybridization for diagnosing urothelial carcinoma

Lin

Liu

et al. 2017

Oncology Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is the most common type of cancer of the bladder and upper urinary tract, and is characterized by a high risk of recurrence and progression. Urine fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a technique that detects genetic aberrations in exfoliated cells in the urine, with specific probes for chromosomes 3, 7 and 17 and the p16 gene. To evaluate the diagnostic value of FISH in UC, 119 patients from November 2010 to June 2012 with suspected UC were recruited into a prospective, cross-sectional study and were followed up for 12-30 months. These patients received voided urine cytology and FISH tests, and underwent cystoscopy and/or ureteroscopy as a reference standard. The final diagnoses confirmed 73 patients with UC, located in the bladder, upper urinary tracts or the two. The sensitivity of FISH for detecting UC was superior to cytology, irrespective of tumor grade and stage: Overall, 80.8 vs. 32.9% (P<0.001); low grade, 75.8 vs. 12.1% (P<0.001); high grade, 85 vs. 50% (P<0.005); non-muscle-invasive, 81.1 vs. 28.3% (P<0.001) and muscle-invasive, 80 vs. 45% (P<0.05), respectively. The specificities of the two tests were similar; overall, the specificity was 89.1% for cytology vs. 100% for FISH, and no significant difference was observed between the methods. Notably, FISH exhibited 100% sensitivity for cytologically non-diagnostic UC, but 33.3% specificity. In conclusion, FISH is a reliable and non-invasive diagnostic tool for bladder and upper urinary tract UC, particularly in patients with low-grade or early stage

show abstract

Strategies for improving power in diagnostic radiology research.

Cited by 54 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of three screening tools to detect psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis (CONTEST study)

Comparison of three screening tools to detect psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis (CONTEST study)

Diagnostic accuracy and yield of screening tests for atrial fibrillation in the family practice setting: a multicentre cohort study

Prospective evaluation of fluorescence in situ hybridization for diagnosing urothelial carcinoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About