Journal Information
Journal ID (publisher-id): BM
Journal ID (nlm-ta): Biochem Med (Zagreb)
Title: Biochemia Medica
Abbreviated Title: Biochem. Med. (Zagreb)
ISSN (print): 1330-0962
ISSN (electronic): 1846-7482
Publisher: Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine
Article Information
Copyright statement: ©Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine.
Copyright: 2025, Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry
License (open-access):
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Date received: 17 October 2024
Date accepted: 30 December 2024
Publication date: 15 February 2025
Publication date: 15 February 2025
Volume: 35
Issue: 1
Electronic Location Identifier: 010101
Publisher ID: bm-35-1-010101
DOI: 10.11613/BM.2025.010101
Diagnostic tests performance indices: an overview
Farrokh Habibzadeh[*]
Author notes:
[*] Corresponding author: Farrokh.Habibzadeh@gmail.com
Author contributions
F Habibzadeh: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, and Project administration.
• To assess the performance of a diagnostic test, we commonly compare it against a gold standard test
• The test sensitivity and specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios are among commonly used twin indices used to assess the performance of a test
• The number needed to misdiagnose is a single index that is more comprehensible for clinicians; it is the number of people who need to be tested in order for one to be misdiagnosed by the test
Diagnostic tests are important means in clinical practice. To assess the performance of a diagnostic test, we commonly need to compare its results to those obtained from a gold standard test. The test sensitivity is the probability of having a positive test in a diseased-patient; the specificity, a negative test result in a disease-free person. However, none of these indices are useful for clinicians who are looking for the inverse probabilities, i.e., the probabilities of the presence and absence of the disease in a person with a positive and negative test result, respectively, the so-called positive and negative predictive values. Likelihood ratios are other performance indices, which are not readily comprehensible to clinicians. There is another index proposed that looks more comprehensible to practicing physicians - the number needed to misdiagnose. It is the number of people who need to be tested in order to find one misdiagnosed (a false positive or a false negative result). For tests with continuous results, it is necessary to set a cut-off point, the choice of which affects the test performance. To arrive at a correct estimation of test performance indices, it is important to use a properly designed study and to consider various aspects that could potentially compromise the validity of the study, including the choice of the gold standard and the population study, among other things. Finally, it may be possible to derive the performance indices of a test solely based on the shape of the distribution of its results in a given group of people.
Keywords: diagnostic tests; sensitivity; specificity; predictive value of tests; likelihood functions; Bayes theorem