Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 59, Issue 8 , Pages 798-801 , August 2006

Post hoc choice of cut points introduced bias to diagnostic research

,Accepted 6 November 2005.

References 

  1. Steel R, Torrie J. Principles and procedures of statstics. In: 2nd ed.. London: McGraw-Hill; 1982;
  2. Sackett DL, Haynes RB. Evidence base of clinical diagnosis: the architecture of diagnostic research. BMJ. 2002;324(7336):539–541
  3. Bossuyt PRJ. The STARD staement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Clin Chem. 2003;49(1):7–18
  4. Justice AC, Covinsky KE, Berlin JA. Assessing the generalizability of prognostic information. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(6):515–524
  5. McGinn TG, Guyatt GH, Wyer PC, Naylor CD, Stiell IG, Richardson WS. Users' guides to the medical literature: XXII: how to use articles about clinical decision rules. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 2000;284(1):79–84
  6. Knottnerus JA, Muris JW. Assessment of the accuracy of diagnostic tests: the cross-sectional study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(11):1118–1128
  7. Kristjansson B, Hill G, McDowell I, Lindsay J. Optimal cut-points when screening for more than one disease state: an example from the canadian study of health and aging. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49(12):1423–1428
  8. Stata . STATA 8.2. Intercooled Stata 8.2 for windows. 98/95/NT ed.. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation; 2002;
  9. Sox H, Blatt M, Higgins M, Marton K. Medical decision making. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1988;
  10. Doust J, Glasziou P, Pietrzak E, Dobson A. A systematic review of the diagnostic accuarcy of natriuretic peptides for heart failure. Archives of Internal Medicine. 2004;164(18):1978–1984

PII: S0895-4356(06)00030-8

doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.11.025

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 59, Issue 8 , Pages 798-801 , August 2006

Article Tools