Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Average Weighted Accuracy: Pragmatic Analysis for a Rapid Diagnostics in Categorizing Acute Lung Infections (RADICAL) Study.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Liu, Y; Tsalik, EL; Jiang, Y; Ko, ER; Woods, CW; Henao, R; Evans, SR
Published in: Clin Infect Dis
June 10, 2020

Patient management relies on diagnostic information to identify appropriate treatment. Standard evaluations of diagnostic tests consist of estimating sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive values, likelihood ratios, and accuracy. Although useful, these metrics do not convey the tests' clinical value, which is critical to informing decision-making. Full appreciation of the clinical impact of a diagnostic test requires analyses that integrate sensitivity and specificity, account for the disease prevalence within the population of test application, and account for the relative importance of specificity vs sensitivity by considering the clinical implications of false-positive and false-negative results. We developed average weighted accuracy (AWA), representing a pragmatic metric of diagnostic yield or global utility of a diagnostic test. AWA can be used to compare test alternatives, even across different studies. We apply the AWA methodology to evaluate a new diagnostic test developed in the Rapid Diagnostics in Categorizing Acute Lung Infections (RADICAL) study.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Clin Infect Dis

DOI

EISSN

1537-6591

Publication Date

June 10, 2020

Volume

70

Issue

12

Start / End Page

2736 / 2742

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Microbiology
  • Lung
  • Humans
  • False Positive Reactions
  • False Negative Reactions
  • Diagnostic Tests, Routine
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
  • 11 Medical and Health Sciences
  • 06 Biological Sciences
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Liu, Y., Tsalik, E. L., Jiang, Y., Ko, E. R., Woods, C. W., Henao, R., & Evans, S. R. (2020). Average Weighted Accuracy: Pragmatic Analysis for a Rapid Diagnostics in Categorizing Acute Lung Infections (RADICAL) Study. Clin Infect Dis, 70(12), 2736–2742. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz437
Liu, Ying, Ephraim L. Tsalik, Yunyun Jiang, Emily R. Ko, Christopher W. Woods, Ricardo Henao, and Scott R. Evans. “Average Weighted Accuracy: Pragmatic Analysis for a Rapid Diagnostics in Categorizing Acute Lung Infections (RADICAL) Study.Clin Infect Dis 70, no. 12 (June 10, 2020): 2736–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz437.
Liu Y, Tsalik EL, Jiang Y, Ko ER, Woods CW, Henao R, et al. Average Weighted Accuracy: Pragmatic Analysis for a Rapid Diagnostics in Categorizing Acute Lung Infections (RADICAL) Study. Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Jun 10;70(12):2736–42.
Liu, Ying, et al. “Average Weighted Accuracy: Pragmatic Analysis for a Rapid Diagnostics in Categorizing Acute Lung Infections (RADICAL) Study.Clin Infect Dis, vol. 70, no. 12, June 2020, pp. 2736–42. Pubmed, doi:10.1093/cid/ciz437.
Liu Y, Tsalik EL, Jiang Y, Ko ER, Woods CW, Henao R, Evans SR. Average Weighted Accuracy: Pragmatic Analysis for a Rapid Diagnostics in Categorizing Acute Lung Infections (RADICAL) Study. Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Jun 10;70(12):2736–2742.
Journal cover image

Published In

Clin Infect Dis

DOI

EISSN

1537-6591

Publication Date

June 10, 2020

Volume

70

Issue

12

Start / End Page

2736 / 2742

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Microbiology
  • Lung
  • Humans
  • False Positive Reactions
  • False Negative Reactions
  • Diagnostic Tests, Routine
  • 3202 Clinical sciences
  • 11 Medical and Health Sciences
  • 06 Biological Sciences