首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research >Sample sizes and precision of estimates of sensitivity and specificity from primary studies on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools: a survey of recently published studies
【2h】

Sample sizes and precision of estimates of sensitivity and specificity from primary studies on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools: a survey of recently published studies

机译:抑郁症筛查工具诊断准确性的基础研究的敏感性和特异性估计的样本大小和准确性:对最近发表的研究的调查

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Depression screening tools are useful to the extent that they accurately discriminate between depressed and non‐depressed patients. Studies without enough patients to generate precise estimates make it difficult to evaluate accuracy. We conducted a survey of recently published studies on depression screening tool accuracy to evaluate the percentage with sample size calculations; the percentage that provided confidence intervals; and precision, based on the width and lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals for sensitivity and specificity. We calculated 95% confidence intervals, if possible, when not provided. Only three of 89 studies (3%) described a viable sample size calculation. Only 30 studies (34%) provided reasonably accurate confidence intervals. Of 86 studies where 95% confidence intervals were provided or could be calculated, only seven (8%) had interval widths for sensitivity of ≤ 10%, whereas 53 (62%) had widths of ≥ 21%. Lower bounds of confidence intervals were < 80% for 84% of studies for sensitivity and 66% of studies for specificity. Overall, few studies on the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools reported sample size calculations, and the number of patients in most studies was too small to generate reasonably precise accuracy estimates. The failure to provide confidence intervals in published reports may obscure these shortcomings. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
机译:抑郁筛查工具在准确地区分抑郁症患者和非抑郁症患者方面非常有用。没有足够的患者来进行精确估计的研究难以评估准确性。我们对最近发表的有关抑郁症筛查工具准确性的研究进行了调查,以评估样本量计算所占的百分比;提供置信区间的百分比;和精确度,基于灵敏度和特异性的95%置信区间的宽度和下限。如果可能的话,我们计算了95%的置信区间。 89项研究中只有3项(3%)描述了可行的样本量计算。只有30项研究(34%)提供了合理准确的置信区间。在提供或可以计算出95%置信区间的86项研究中,只有七个(8%)的区间宽度灵敏度≤10%,而53个(62%)的区间宽度≥21%。对于84%的敏感性研究和66%的特异性研究,置信区间的下限<80%。总体而言,很少有关于抑郁症筛查工具的诊断准确性的研究报告了样本量的计算,并且大多数研究中的患者人数太少而无法产生合理精确的准确性估计。无法在已发布的报告中提供置信区间可能会掩盖这些缺点。版权所有©2016 John Wiley&Sons,Ltd.

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号