4.6 Review

A review identifies and classifies reasons for ordering diagnostic tests

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 10, Pages 981-989

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.01.012

Keywords

diagnostic test; review; low back pain; multiple sclerosis; test ordering

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council [MC_U145079314] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Medical Research Council [MC_U145079314] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. MRC [MC_U145079314] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To consider the reasons and context for test ordering by doctors when faced with an undiagnosed complaint in primary or secondary care. Study Design and Setting: We reviewed any study of any design that discussed factors that may affect a doctor's decision to order a test. Articles were located through searches of electronic databases, authors' files on diagnostic methodology, and reference lists of relevant studies. We extracted data on: study design, type of analysis, setting, topic area, and any factors reported to influence test ordering. Results: We included 37 studies. We carried out a thematic analysis to synthesize data. Five key groupings arose from this process: diagnostic factors, therapeutic and prognostic factors, patient-related factors, doctor-related factors, and policy and organization-related factors. To illustrate how the various factors identified may influence test ordering we considered the symptom low back pain and the diagnosis multiple sclerosis as examples. Conclusions: A wide variety of factors influence a doctor's decision to order a test. These are integral to understanding diagnosis in clinical practice. Traditional diagnostic accuracy studies should be supplemented with research into the broader context in which doctors perform their work. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available