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
Review
. 2015 Mar;45(3):317-28.
doi: 10.1007/s00247-014-2944-x. Epub 2015 Mar 1.

What you need to know about statistics, part II: reliability of diagnostic and screening tests

Affiliations
Review

What you need to know about statistics, part II: reliability of diagnostic and screening tests

Marwan Zidan et al. Pediatr Radiol. 2015 Mar.

Abstract

The foundation for the usefulness of any diagnostic test should be that it is both reliable and accurate in its clinical diagnosis. In this article we present the second of a two-part series on validity and reliability, discussing the assessment of reliability among raters of diagnostic tests and between diagnostics tests themselves. To examine reproducibility (reliability) among raters of diagnostic tests we present the calculation of two statistical procedures: (1) the kappa coefficient statistic when presented with categorical data for the presence or absence of a clinical diagnosis and (2) the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for continuously scaled data among raters. The accuracy among diagnostic tests (i.e. their interchangeability) can be evaluated by application of (1) a Bland-Altman plot procedure (with its 95% limits of agreement) and (2) the Passing-Bablok regression procedure (for the identification and evaluation of systematic and proportional differences). When deciding whether to select a diagnostic test one must evaluate its ability to provide more precise information than a gold standard test, and whether in clinical practice it would be more beneficial for patients to adopt it.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Psychol Rep. 1966 Aug;19(1):3-11 - PubMed
    1. Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10 - PubMed
    1. Can Med Assoc J. 1981 Mar 15;124(6):703-10 - PubMed
    1. Stat Methods Med Res. 1998 Sep;7(3):301-17 - PubMed
    1. J Neurol. 2000 Nov;247(11):825-34 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources