Research Article
Comparing diagnostic tests: a simple graphic using likelihood ratios
Article first published online: 2 MAR 2000
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(20000315)19:5<649::AID-SIM371>3.0.CO;2-H
Published in 2000 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Additional Information
How to Cite
Biggerstaff, B. J. (2000), Comparing diagnostic tests: a simple graphic using likelihood ratios. Statistics in Medicine, 19: 649–663. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(20000315)19:5<649::AID-SIM371>3.0.CO;2-H
Publication History
- Issue published online: 2 MAR 2000
- Article first published online: 2 MAR 2000
- Manuscript Accepted:
- Manuscript Received:
- Abstract
- References
- Cited By
Abstract
The diagnostic abilities of two or more diagnostic tests are traditionally compared by their respective sensitivities and specificities, either separately or using a summary of them such as Youden's index. Several authors have argued that the likelihood ratios provide a more appropriate, if in practice a less intuitive, comparison. We present a simple graphic which incorporates all these measures and admits easily interpreted comparison of two or more diagnostic tests. We show, using likelihood ratios and this graphic, that a test can be superior to a competitor in terms of predictive values while having either sensitivity or specificity smaller. A decision theoretic basis for the interpretation of the graph is given by relating it to the tent graph of Hilden and Glasziou (Statistics in Medicine, 1996). Finally, a brief example comparing two serodiagnostic tests for Lyme disease is presented. Published in 2000 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1097-0258/asset/SIM_left.gif?v=1&s=1b631772c3897aa95941da3609d901cd1d389e83)
1097-0258/asset/olbannerright.gif?v=1&s=6d257623b3308a7485294c87b3b5e1e665484099)
1097-0258/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=64ebf4a6597e744f418c952845cddf175ccc795f)