Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response

Dena M. Bravata, Vandana Sundaram, Kathryn M. McDonald, Wendy M. Smith, Herbert Szeto, Mark D. Schleinitz, Douglas K. Owens

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

We evaluated the usefulness of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems for bioterrorism response. We performed a systematic review by searching relevant databases (e.g., MEDLINE) and Web sites for reports of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems that could be used during bioterrorism responses. We reviewed over 24,000 citations and identified 55 detection systems and 23 diagnostic decision support systems. Only 35 systems have been evaluated: 4 reported both sensitivity and specificity, 13 were compared to a reference standard, and 31 were evaluated for their timeliness. Most evaluations of detection systems and some evaluations of diagnostic systems for bioterrorism responses are critically deficient. Because false-positive and false-negative rates are unknown for most systems, decision making on the basis of these systems is seriously compromised. We describe a framework for the design of future evaluations of such systems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)100-108
Number of pages9
JournalEmerging infectious diseases
Volume10
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Bioterrorism
MEDLINE
Decision Making
Databases
Sensitivity and Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Microbiology (medical)
  • Infectious Diseases

Cite this

Bravata, D. M., Sundaram, V., McDonald, K. M., Smith, W. M., Szeto, H., Schleinitz, M. D., & Owens, D. K. (2004). Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response. Emerging infectious diseases, 10(1), 100-108. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1001.030243

Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response. / Bravata, Dena M.; Sundaram, Vandana; McDonald, Kathryn M.; Smith, Wendy M.; Szeto, Herbert; Schleinitz, Mark D.; Owens, Douglas K.

In: Emerging infectious diseases, Vol. 10, No. 1, 01.2004, p. 100-108.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Bravata, DM, Sundaram, V, McDonald, KM, Smith, WM, Szeto, H, Schleinitz, MD & Owens, DK 2004, 'Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response', Emerging infectious diseases, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 100-108. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1001.030243
Bravata, Dena M. ; Sundaram, Vandana ; McDonald, Kathryn M. ; Smith, Wendy M. ; Szeto, Herbert ; Schleinitz, Mark D. ; Owens, Douglas K. / Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response. In: Emerging infectious diseases. 2004 ; Vol. 10, No. 1. pp. 100-108.
@article{3c80c9c131b84628aa8af039022cae1c,
title = "Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response",
abstract = "We evaluated the usefulness of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems for bioterrorism response. We performed a systematic review by searching relevant databases (e.g., MEDLINE) and Web sites for reports of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems that could be used during bioterrorism responses. We reviewed over 24,000 citations and identified 55 detection systems and 23 diagnostic decision support systems. Only 35 systems have been evaluated: 4 reported both sensitivity and specificity, 13 were compared to a reference standard, and 31 were evaluated for their timeliness. Most evaluations of detection systems and some evaluations of diagnostic systems for bioterrorism responses are critically deficient. Because false-positive and false-negative rates are unknown for most systems, decision making on the basis of these systems is seriously compromised. We describe a framework for the design of future evaluations of such systems.",
author = "Bravata, {Dena M.} and Vandana Sundaram and McDonald, {Kathryn M.} and Smith, {Wendy M.} and Herbert Szeto and Schleinitz, {Mark D.} and Owens, {Douglas K.}",
year = "2004",
month = "1",
doi = "10.3201/eid1001.030243",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "100--108",
journal = "Emerging Infectious Diseases",
issn = "1080-6040",
publisher = "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating Detection and Diagnostic Decision Support Systems for Bioterrorism Response

AU - Bravata, Dena M.

AU - Sundaram, Vandana

AU - McDonald, Kathryn M.

AU - Smith, Wendy M.

AU - Szeto, Herbert

AU - Schleinitz, Mark D.

AU - Owens, Douglas K.

PY - 2004/1

Y1 - 2004/1

N2 - We evaluated the usefulness of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems for bioterrorism response. We performed a systematic review by searching relevant databases (e.g., MEDLINE) and Web sites for reports of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems that could be used during bioterrorism responses. We reviewed over 24,000 citations and identified 55 detection systems and 23 diagnostic decision support systems. Only 35 systems have been evaluated: 4 reported both sensitivity and specificity, 13 were compared to a reference standard, and 31 were evaluated for their timeliness. Most evaluations of detection systems and some evaluations of diagnostic systems for bioterrorism responses are critically deficient. Because false-positive and false-negative rates are unknown for most systems, decision making on the basis of these systems is seriously compromised. We describe a framework for the design of future evaluations of such systems.

AB - We evaluated the usefulness of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems for bioterrorism response. We performed a systematic review by searching relevant databases (e.g., MEDLINE) and Web sites for reports of detection systems and diagnostic decision support systems that could be used during bioterrorism responses. We reviewed over 24,000 citations and identified 55 detection systems and 23 diagnostic decision support systems. Only 35 systems have been evaluated: 4 reported both sensitivity and specificity, 13 were compared to a reference standard, and 31 were evaluated for their timeliness. Most evaluations of detection systems and some evaluations of diagnostic systems for bioterrorism responses are critically deficient. Because false-positive and false-negative rates are unknown for most systems, decision making on the basis of these systems is seriously compromised. We describe a framework for the design of future evaluations of such systems.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0347991890&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0347991890&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3201/eid1001.030243

DO - 10.3201/eid1001.030243

M3 - Review article

C2 - 15078604

AN - SCOPUS:0347991890

VL - 10

SP - 100

EP - 108

JO - Emerging Infectious Diseases

JF - Emerging Infectious Diseases

SN - 1080-6040

IS - 1

ER -