Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Jun;27 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S20-7.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1802-x.

Chapter 3: choosing the important outcomes for a systematic review of a medical test

Jodi B Segal  1
Affiliations

Chapter 3: choosing the important outcomes for a systematic review of a medical test

Jodi B Segal. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun.

Abstract

In this chapter of the Evidence-based Practice Centers Methods Guide for Medical Tests, we describe how the decision to use a medical test generates a broad range of outcomes and that each of these outcomes should be considered for inclusion in a systematic review. Awareness of these varied outcomes affects how a decision maker balances the benefits and risks of the test; therefore, a systematic review should present the evidence on these diverse outcomes. The key outcome categories include clinical management outcomes and direct health effects; emotional, social, cognitive, and behavioral responses to testing; legal and ethical outcomes, and costs. We describe the challenges of incorporating these outcomes in a systematic review, suggest a framework for generating potential outcomes for inclusion, and describe the role of stakeholders in choosing the outcomes for study. Finally, we give examples of systematic reviews that either included a range of outcomes or that might have done so. The following are the key messages in this chapter: Consider both the outcomes that are relevant to the process of testing and those that are relevant to the results of the test. Consider inclusion of outcomes in all five domains: clinical management effects, direct test effects; emotional, social, cognitive and behavioral effects; legal and ethical effects, and costs. Consider to which group the outcomes of testing are most relevant. Given resource limitations, prioritize which outcomes to include. This decision depends on the needs of the stakeholder(s), who should be assisted in prioritizing the outcomes for inclusion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Balance of outcomes against resources.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mapping outcomes to the testing process and to the test results.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Screening example: bacterial vaginosis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

  • Chapter 7: grading a body of evidence on diagnostic tests.
    Singh S, Chang SM, Matchar DB, Bass EB. Singh S, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun;27 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S47-55. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2021-9. J Gen Intern Med. 2012. PMID: 22648675 Free PMC article.
  • Choosing the Important Outcomes for a Systematic Review of a Medical Test.
    Segal JB. Segal JB. In: Chang SM, Matchar DB, Smetana GW, Umscheid CA, editors. Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012 Jun. Chapter 3. In: Chang SM, Matchar DB, Smetana GW, Umscheid CA, editors. Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012 Jun. Chapter 3. PMID: 22834029 Free Books & Documents. Review.
  • The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF, Ovelman C, McGuire W. Soll RF, et al. Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
  • Chapter 6: assessing applicability of medical test studies in systematic reviews.
    Hartmann KE, Matchar DB, Chang S. Hartmann KE, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun;27 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S39-46. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1961-9. J Gen Intern Med. 2012. PMID: 22648674 Free PMC article.
  • Challenges in systematic reviews of diagnostic technologies.
    Tatsioni A, Zarin DA, Aronson N, Samson DJ, Flamm CR, Schmid C, Lau J. Tatsioni A, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2005 Jun 21;142(12 Pt 2):1048-55. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-142-12_part_2-200506211-00004. Ann Intern Med. 2005. PMID: 15968029 Review.
See all similar articles

Cited by

  • Evaluation of Harms Reporting in U.S. Cancer Screening Guidelines.
    Kamineni A, Doria-Rose VP, Chubak J, Inadomi JM, Corley DA, Haas JS, Kobrin SC, Winer RL, Elston Lafata J, Beaber EF, Yudkin JS, Zheng Y, Skinner CS, Schottinger JE, Ritzwoller DP, Croswell JM, Burnett-Hartman AN. Kamineni A, et al. Ann Intern Med. 2022 Nov;175(11):1582-1590. doi: 10.7326/M22-1139. Epub 2022 Sep 27. Ann Intern Med. 2022. PMID: 36162112 Free PMC article. Review.
  • Chapter 7: grading a body of evidence on diagnostic tests.
    Singh S, Chang SM, Matchar DB, Bass EB. Singh S, et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Jun;27 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S47-55. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2021-9. J Gen Intern Med. 2012. PMID: 22648675 Free PMC article.

References

    1. Bossuyt PM, McCaffery K. Additional patient outcomes and pathways in evaluations of testing. Med Decis Making. 2009;29:E30–E38. doi: 10.1177/0272989X09347013. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Berlin L, Berlin JW. Malpractice and radiologists in Cook County, IL: trends in 20 years of litigation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;165:781–788. - PubMed
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. http://www.effectivehealthcareahrqgov/indexcfm/search-forguides-reviews-... [serial online] 2009; Accessed September 20, 2010.
    1. Matchar DB, Thakur ME, Grossman I, et al. Testing for cytochrome P450 polymorphisms in adults with non-psychotic depression treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2007;1–77. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bonis PA, Trikalinos TA, Chung M, et al. Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer: diagnostic strategies and their implications. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2007;1–180. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources