ArticleBMC medical research methodology2012
Using patient management as a surrogate for patient health outcomes in diagnostic test evaluation.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Practices to Support Appropriate Laboratory Test Utilization: A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.American journal of clinical pathology · 2018Pooled it
- Impact of Molecular Diagnostics for Tuberculosis on Patient-Important Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Study Methodologies.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Beyond treatment adjustment: clinical utility of repeat kidney biopsy in pediatric IgA vasculitis nephritis.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Changes in patient management after preoperative MRI for newly diagnosed breast cancer: a multicentre prospective observational study.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Observational
- Biological variation: Understanding why it is so important?Practical laboratory medicine · 2021Review
- Article
- Intended Versus Inferred Treatment AfterJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2018Article
- Hospice Admission and Survival AfterJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2018Article
- The efficacy of bedside chest ultrasound: from accuracy to outcomes.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2016Review
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Targeted Imaging Agents.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2016Review
- Reply.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2016Article
- Intended versus inferred care after PET performed for initial staging in the National Oncologic PET Registry.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2013Article
- Intended versus inferred management after PET for cancer restaging: analysis of Medicare claims linked to a coverage with evidence development registry.Medical care · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBefore a new test is introduced in clinical practice, evidence is needed to demonstrate that its use will lead to improvements in patient health outcomes. Studies reporting test accuracy may not be sufficient, and clinical trials of tests that measure patient health outcomes are rarely feasible. Therefore, the consequences of testing on patient management are often investigated as an intermediate step in the pathway. There is a lack of guidance on the interpretation of this evidence, and patient management studies often neglect a discussion of the limitations of measuring patient management as a surrogate for health outcomes.
methodsWe discuss the rationale for measuring patient management, describe the common study designs and provide guidance about how this evidence should be reported.
resultsInterpretation of patient management studies relies on the condition that patient management is a valid surrogate for downstream patient benefits. This condition presupposes two critical assumptions: the test improves diagnostic accuracy; and the measured changes in patient management improve patient health outcomes. The validity of this evidence depends on the certainty around these critical assumptions and the ability of the study design to minimise bias. Three common designs are test RCTs that measure patient management as a primary endpoint, diagnostic before-after studies that compare planned patient management before and after testing, and accuracy studies that are extended to report on the actual treatment or further tests received following a positive and negative test result.
conclusionsPatient management can be measured as a surrogate outcome for test evaluation if its limitations are recognised. The potential consequences of a positive and negative test result on patient management should be pre-specified and the potential patient benefits of these management changes clearly stated. Randomised comparisons will provide higher quality evidence about differences in patient management using the new test than observational studies. Regardless of the study design used, the critical assumption that patient management is a valid surrogate for downstream patient benefits or harms must be discussed in these studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.