IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v33y2013i2p225-234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are Standard Diagnostic Test Characteristics Sufficient for the Assessment of Continual Patient Monitoring?

Author

Listed:
  • Liangyou Chen
  • Andrew T. Reisner
  • Xiaoxiao Chen
  • Andrei Gribok
  • Jaques Reifman

Abstract

Background. For diagnostic processes involving continual measurements from a single patient, conventional test characteristics, such as sensitivity and specificity, do not consider decision consistency, which might be a distinct, clinically relevant test characteristic. Objective . The authors investigated the performance of a decision-support classifier for the diagnosis of traumatic injury with blood loss, implemented with three different data-processing methods. For each method, they computed standard diagnostic test characteristics and novel metrics related to decision consistency and latency. Setting. Prehospital air ambulance transport. Patients. A total of 557 trauma patients. Design . Continually monitored vital-sign data from 279 patients (50%) were randomly selected for classifier development, and the remaining were used for testing. Three data-processing methods were evaluated over 16 min of patient monitoring: a 2-min moving window, time averaging, and postprocessing with the sequential probability ratio test (SPRT). Measurements . Sensitivity and specificity were computed. Consistency was quantified through cumulative counts of decision changes over time and the fraction of patients affected by false alarms. Latency was evaluated by the fraction of patients without a decision. Results . All 3 methods showed very similar final sensitivities and specificities. Yet, there were significant differences in terms of the fraction of patients affected by false alarms, decision changes through time, and latency. For instance, use of the SPRT led to a 75% reduction in the number of decision changes and a 36% reduction in the number of patients affected by false alarms, at the expense of 3% unresolved final decisions. Conclusion . The proposed metrics of decision consistency and decision latency provided additional information beyond what could be obtained from test sensitivity and specificity and are likely to be clinically relevant in some applications involving temporal decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Liangyou Chen & Andrew T. Reisner & Xiaoxiao Chen & Andrei Gribok & Jaques Reifman, 2013. "Are Standard Diagnostic Test Characteristics Sufficient for the Assessment of Continual Patient Monitoring?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(2), pages 225-234, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:33:y:2013:i:2:p:225-234
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X12451059
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X12451059
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X12451059?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:33:y:2013:i:2:p:225-234. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.