Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To determine the acceptable level of positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for classification criteria for gout, given the type of study.
Methods: We conducted an international web-based survey with 91 general practitioners and rheumatologists experienced in gout. Conjoint analysis was used as the framework for designing and analyzing pairs of 2 profiles, each describing a study type, a PPV, and an NPV. There were 5 study types presented: a phase III randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug versus prednisone for acute gout flares, a phase III RCT of a biologic agent for acute gout flares, a phase II RCT of a novel uricosuric drug of unknown efficacy and limited toxicity data, a case-control, genome-wide association study of gout, and a cohort study examining long-term outcomes of gout. PPV and NPV both had 5 levels ranging from 60-99%.
Results: The panelists in majority were male (65%) rheumatologists (93%) with an average of 19 years of practice, seeing 5 to 60 gout patients monthly. PPV was most highly weighted in decision making: the relative importance was 59% for PPV, 29% for NPV, and 13% for study type. The preferred PPV was 90% or 80%, with an accompanying NPV of 70% or 80%, dependent on study type.
Conclusion: Preferred PPVs and NPVs range between 70% and 90% and differ by study type. A single cut point can be a reasonable approach for all study types if a PPV of 90% and NPV of 80% is approximated.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acr.22875 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!