scholarly journals Aeroallergen sensitisation for detecting asthma in primary care: a diagnostic test accuracy study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janwillem W.H. Kocks ◽  
Heinze J.H. Andringa ◽  
Ellen van Heijst ◽  
Renaud Louis ◽  
Inigo Ojanguren Arranz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Accuracy Study

MACE for the Diagnosis of Dementia and MCI: 3-Year Pragmatic Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 300-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Williamson ◽  
Andrew J. Larner
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Cognitive Disorders ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Cognitive Screening ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Diagnosis Of Dementia ◽  
Accuracy Study ◽  
Secondary Care Setting

Background/Aims: The Mini-Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (MACE) is a relatively new short cognitive screening instrument for the detection of patients with dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Few studies of the MACE have been reported hitherto. The aim of this study was to undertake a pragmatic diagnostic test accuracy study of MACE in a large cohort of patients seen in a dedicated cognitive disorders clinic. Methods: MACE was administered to consecutive patients referred to a neurology-led Cognitive Function Clinic over the course of 3 years to assess its performance for the diagnosis of dementia and MCI using various test metrics. Results: In a cohort of 599 patients, the prevalence of dementia and MCI by criterion diagnosis was 0.17 and 0.29, respectively. MACE had a high sensitivity (> 0.9) and negative predictive values (> 0.8) with large effect sizes (Cohen’s d > 1) for the diagnosis of both dementia and MCI but a low specificity (< 0.5) and positive predictive values (≤0.5). Conclusion: MACE is an acceptable test for the assessment of cognitive complaints in a secondary care setting with good metrics for identifying cases of both dementia and MCI.

scholarly journals A smartphone-based test for the assessment of attention deficits in delirium: A case-control diagnostic test accuracy study in older hospitalised patients

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. e0227471 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoë Tieges ◽  
David J. Stott ◽  
Robert Shaw ◽  
Elaine Tang ◽  
Lisa-Marie Rutter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Attention Deficits ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Hospitalised Patients ◽  
Accuracy Study

scholarly journals Identifying care-home residents in routine healthcare datasets: a diagnostic test accuracy study of five methods

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer K Burton ◽  
Charis A Marwick ◽  
James Galloway ◽  
Christopher Hall ◽  
Thomas Nind ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Care Home ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Accuracy Study

P-016: Evaluation of delirium screening tools in geriatric medical in-patients: A diagnostic test accuracy study

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. S36
Author(s):  
K. Hendry ◽  
T. Quinn ◽  
H. Miller ◽  
J. Burns ◽  
A.L. Cunnington ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Accuracy Study

Commonly Used Screening Instruments to Identify Frailty Among Community-Dwelling Older People in a General Practice (Primary Care) Setting: A Study of Diagnostic Test Accuracy

2019 ◽  
Vol 75 (6) ◽  
pp. 1134-1142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel C Ambagtsheer ◽  
Renuka Visvanathan ◽  
Elsa Dent ◽  
Solomon Yu ◽  
Timothy J Schultz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Older People ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Diagnostic Test Accuracy ◽  
Test Accuracy ◽  
Screening Instruments ◽  
Residential Care Facility ◽  
Index Tests

Abstract Background Rapid frailty screening remains problematic in primary care. The diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of several screening instruments has not been sufficiently established. We evaluated the DTA of several screening instruments against two reference standards: Fried’s Frailty Phenotype [FP] and the Adelaide Frailty Index [AFI]), a self-reported questionnaire. Methods DTA study within three general practices in South Australia. We randomly recruited 243 general practice patients aged 75+ years. Eligible participants were 75+ years, proficient in English and community-dwelling. We excluded those who were receiving palliative care, hospitalized or living in a residential care facility. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, Youden Index and area under the curve (AUC) for: Edmonton Frail Scale [EFS], FRAIL Scale Questionnaire [FQ], Gait Speed Test [GST], Groningen Frailty Indicator [GFI], Kihon Checklist [KC], Polypharmacy [POLY], PRISMA-7 [P7], Reported Edmonton Frail Scale [REFS], Self-Rated Health [SRH] and Timed Up and Go [TUG]) against FP [3+ criteria] and AFI [&gt;0.21]. Results We obtained valid data for 228 participants, with missing scores for index tests multiply imputed. Frailty prevalence was 17.5% frail, 56.6% prefrail [FP], and 48.7% frail, 29.0% prefrail [AFI]. Of the index tests KC (Se: 85.0% [70.2–94.3]; Sp: 73.4% [66.5–79.6]) and REFS (Se: 87.5% [73.2–95.8]; Sp: 75.5% [68.8–81.5]), both against FP, showed sufficient diagnostic accuracy according to our prespecified criteria. Conclusions Two screening instruments—the KC and REFS, show the most promise for wider implementation within general practice, enabling a personalized approach to care for older people with frailty.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document