Systematic review, meta-analysis and economic modelling of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Assessment of diagnostic and prognostic accuracyStudy TP FP FN TN Sensitivity Specificity Sensitivity SpecificityAmodio 2007 52 85 65 25 341 0.78 (0.70 to 0.85) 0.84 (0.81 to 0.88)Apple 2008 53 138 78 19 310 0.88 (0.82 to 0.92) 0.80 (0.76 to 0.84)Apple 2008 54 36 52 13 270 0.75 (0.63 to 0.85) 0.84 (0.80 to 0.88)Apple 2009 55 18 49 7 383 0.75 (0.58 to 0.87) 0.89 (0.86 to 0.92)Body 2011 57 54 23 75 553 0.44 (0.35 to 0.52) 0.96 (0.94 to 0.97)Charpentier 2010 59 56 8 43 570 0.57 (0.48 to 0.67) 0.98 (0.97 to 0.99)Ilva 2009 50 105 0 29 158 0.78 (0.70 to 0.84) 0.99 (0.97 to 1.00)Keller 2009 20 375 138 38 1267 0.90 (0.87 to 0.93) 0.90 (0.89 to 0.92)Reichlin 2009 19 109 48 14 547 0.88 (0.82 to 0.93) 0.92 (0.90 to 0.94)Pooled effect 0.77 (0.63 to 0.87) 0.93 (0.85 to 0.97)Predictive effect 0.77 (0.29 to 0.96) 0.93 (0.46 to 1.00)0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.00 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0FIGURE 7 Meta-analysis of studies of TnI using the 99th percentile.Study TP FP FN TN Sensitivity Specificity Sensitivity SpecificityAmodio 2007 52 70 28 40 378 0.66 (0.56 to 0.74) 0.93 (0.91 to 0.95)Apple 2008 53 120 22 37 366 0.77 (0.70 to 0.83) 0.94 (0.92 to 0.96)Collinson 2006 62 53 25 7 121 0.87 (0.78 to 0.94) 0.85 (0.79 to 0.90)Collinson 2006 48 35 26 2 475 0.90 (0.80 to 0.97) 0.95 (0.92 to 0.96)LeFevre 2007 72 24 2 12 37 0.70 (0.55 to 0.82) 0.94 (0.87 to 0.98)Reichlin 2009 19 105 42 18 553 0.85 (0.78 to 0.90) 0.93 (0.91 to 0.95)Rudolph 2010 81 86 17 14 157 0.86 (0.78 to 0.91) 0.91 (0.86 to 0.94)Pooled effect 0.82 (0.69 to 0.90) 0.93 (0.88 to 0.96)Predictive effect 0.82 (0.40 to 0.97) 0.93 (0.74 to 0.98)0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.00 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0FIGURE 8 Meta-analysis of studies of TnI using 10% CV.32NIHR Journals Library
DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Technology Assessment 2013 Vol. 17 No. 1Study TP FP FN TN Sensitivity Specificity Sensitivity SpecificityBody 2011 46 95 37 32 549 0.75 (0.68 to 0.82) 0.94 (0.92 to 0.95)Christ 2010 60 18 22 2 95 0.86 (0.71 to 0.96) 0.83 (0.75 to 0.89)Keller 2009 20 300 111 113 1294 0.73 (0.69 to 0.77) 0.92 (0.91 to 0.93)Reichlin 2009 19 102 42 21 553 0.82 (0.75 to 0.88) 0.93 (0.91 to 0.95)Pooled effect 0.80 (0.61 to 0.92) 0.91 (0.80 to 0.96)Predictive effect 0.80 (0.33 to 0.97) 0.91 (0.53 to 0.99)0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.00 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0FIGURE 9 Meta-analysis of studies of TnT using the 99th percentile.Study TP FP FN TN Sensitivity Specificity Sensitivity SpecificityChrist 2010 60 13 11 7 106 0.71 (0.51 to 0.84) 0.92 (0.87 to 0.96)Collinson 2006 62 54 12 6 134 0.87 (0.77 to 0.94) 0.93 (0.88 to 0.96)Haltern 2010 67 23 0 8 63 0.74 (0.59 to 0.86) 0.98 (0.94 to 1.00)Keller 2009 20 263 39 150 1366 0.64 (0.59 to 0.69) 0.97 (0.96 to 0.98)McCann 2008 76 149 13 50 204 0.75 (0.69 to 0.80) 0.94 (0.91 to 0.97)Reichlin 2009 19 89 18 34 577 0.73 (0.65 to 0.80) 0.97 (0.95 to 0.98)Pooled effect 0.74 (0.60 to 0.85) 0.96 (0.91 to 0.98)Predictive effect 0.74 (0.35 to 0.94) 0.96 (0.76 to 0.99)0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.00 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0FIGURE 10 Meta-analysis of studies of TnT using 10% CV.© Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2013. This work was produced by Goodacre et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of Statefor Health. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journalsprovided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should beaddressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton SciencePark, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.33
Page 1: Health Technology AssessmentVOLUME
Page 7: DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 10 and 11: ContentsAppendix 5 Expected discoun
Page 13 and 14: DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 19: DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 22 and 23: BackgroundTABLE 1 Hospital admissio
Page 24 and 25: Background2. investigation of the c
Page 26 and 27: BackgroundComputed tomographic coro
Page 28 and 29: Research questionsiii. the diagnost
Page 30 and 31: Assessment of diagnostic and progno
Page 103 and 104:
DOI: 10.3310/hta17010 Health Techno
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125:
Page 128 and 129:
Discussionspecificity were 62% (95%
Page 130 and 131:
Discussionneed for revascularisatio
Page 132 and 133:
Discussionchanges in sensitivity an
Page 134 and 135:
Discussionuncertainty about these p
Page 136 and 137:
Discussiontroponin assays have bett
Page 138 and 139:
ConclusionsSuggested research prior
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151:
Page 154 and 155:
Appendix 144. heart-type fatty acid
Page 156 and 157:
Appendix 1135. interleukin 33.mp. (
Page 158 and 159:
Appendix 147. 37 and 45 (529)48. li
Page 161:
Page 164 and 165:
Appendix 313. Fernandez Portales JG
Page 166 and 167:
Appendix 346. Luscher MS, Ravkilde
Page 168 and 169:
Appendix 316. Rao SV, Ohman EM, Gra
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195:
Page 198 and 199:
Appendix 9Clinical diagnosis of NST
Page 200 and 201:
Appendix 9respectively. Exercise EC
Page 202 and 203:
Appendix 93. Two reviewers will mak
Page 204 and 205:
Appendix 9The methodology used in t
Page 206 and 207:
Appendix 9ES (Information Resources
Page 208:
Appendix 923. Westwood ME, Whiting
show all

Systematic review, meta-analysis and economic modelling of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?