 |
 |
Dear Piersante, Though I like the name "diagnostic cohort" study, most other folk working in diagnostics are unhappy with the time frame it implies. So cross-sectional analytic study is the most accepted term for the reasonable design of taking a series of patients with the same presenting complaint and the applying some agreed gold standard to all cases. If someone can think of a better name for this, I think it would be leapt on with glee, Paul Glasziou At 31/10/2004, Piersante Sestini wrote: >What is the name (or a good name) for studies on diagnostic tests, the ones >in which suspect patients are prospectively recruited and subjected to both >the test under study and a gold standard? > >I used to liken them to cohort studies, but on the "Users' guides to the >medical literature" (part 1A1) they are indicated as <Cross sectional >analytic studies> (whatever that means). > >I do realize that although the patients are recruited prospectively, these >studies are cross sectional in nature. So "Cross sectional study on >incident suspect cases" could be an option? Except when the gold standard >actually requires a long follow up to rule out the disease, which >complicates the matters... > >I need a simple and logic-looking name to tell to my students, who are >mostly epidemiophobic and don't like much complexity or uncertainty in what >they learn. > >thanks, > >Piersante Sestini Paul Glasziou Department of Primary Health Care & Director, Centre for Evidence-Based Practice, Oxford ph: 44-1865-227055 www.cebm.net