ArticleInternational journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases2021
Managing the risks of making the wrong diagnosis: First, do no harm.
Article in International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- How good are artificial intelligence tools at identifying benign skin lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the specificity of artificial intelligence tools in diagnosing suspicious skin lesions.Skin health and disease · 2026Review
- TRIAGE: Trustworthy Reporting and Assessment for Clinical Gain and Effectiveness of AI Models.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evaluation of an electricity-independent method for IS2404 Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) diagnosis of Buruli ulcer in resource-limited settings.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Potential Impact of a Diagnostic Test for Detecting Prepatent Guinea Worm Infections in Dogs.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2024Article
- Obstructive sleep apnea detection during wakefulness: a comprehensive methodological review.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2024Review
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Clinical Diagnostic Scoring Systems for Childhood Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Serology for visceral leishmaniasis: How trusty is the accuracy reported by the manufacturers?Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2023Review
- Misdiagnosis rate among negative COVID-19 patients in real-life with Panbio COVID-19 antigen rapid test during 2021.The Journal of infection · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The appropriate use of diagnostics is important as misdiagnosis may have serious consequences. Confidence in a diagnostic test result depends on the test's accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) in the context of the use-case (who is tested and why) and the prevalence of the condition investigated. Here, we offer an approach to diagnostics focused on the risks and effects of making the wrong diagnosis. We propose 'fitness brackets' for a given test to define the range within which the test is fit-for-purpose, based on the use-case and risk-management principles. We use as exemplars tests for dengue pre-vaccination screening and tests for diagnosing Covid-19 in different settings.
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.