Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Medical Testing-Reply

Medical Testing-Reply Abstract In Reply. —While the majority of reactions to the COMMENTARY have been supportive of the need to establish standards to classify medical tests as either worthwhile, useless, or somewhere in between, one particular thorn in the rhetoric seems to have pricked some apparently paranoid clinical pathologists, to wit: they challenge the contention that one of every seven medical tests is either in error or unreliable. It seems that the complainants first transmogrify the word medical into laboratory and then protest too much. Although one cited, albeit disputed, reference referred primarily to errors in laboratory testing, the COMMENTARY clearly stipulated all forms of medical tests; the laboratory does not stand alone as the citadel of diagnostic support.While the deputy director of the CDC bureau of laboratories who proffered the disputed laboratory test error rate subsequently did concede he made an error in his calculations and interpretations of one particular non-CDC References 1. CDC official admits mistakes in report on lab results errors : Am Med News , (May 23) , 1980. 2. Forrest JV, Friedman PJ: Radiologic errors in patients with lung cancer. West J Med 1981;134: 485-490. 3. Kolata GB: Lawsuit points up debate over exercise cardiograms. Science 1978;202:1175.Crossref 4. Claim paps misread by pathologists. Med Tribune , (Aug 11) , 1982. (August 11):3. 5. Conventional blood pressure screening is said to yield errors as often as 50%. Int Med News 1978;11:1,50. 6. Cavenaugh EL: A method for determining costs associated with laboratory error. Am J Public Health 1981;71:831-834.Crossref http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Internal Medicine American Medical Association

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/medical-testing-reply-AVeW5lkSzj
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0003-9926
eISSN
1538-3679
DOI
10.1001/archinte.1983.00350100198046
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract In Reply. —While the majority of reactions to the COMMENTARY have been supportive of the need to establish standards to classify medical tests as either worthwhile, useless, or somewhere in between, one particular thorn in the rhetoric seems to have pricked some apparently paranoid clinical pathologists, to wit: they challenge the contention that one of every seven medical tests is either in error or unreliable. It seems that the complainants first transmogrify the word medical into laboratory and then protest too much. Although one cited, albeit disputed, reference referred primarily to errors in laboratory testing, the COMMENTARY clearly stipulated all forms of medical tests; the laboratory does not stand alone as the citadel of diagnostic support.While the deputy director of the CDC bureau of laboratories who proffered the disputed laboratory test error rate subsequently did concede he made an error in his calculations and interpretations of one particular non-CDC References 1. CDC official admits mistakes in report on lab results errors : Am Med News , (May 23) , 1980. 2. Forrest JV, Friedman PJ: Radiologic errors in patients with lung cancer. West J Med 1981;134: 485-490. 3. Kolata GB: Lawsuit points up debate over exercise cardiograms. Science 1978;202:1175.Crossref 4. Claim paps misread by pathologists. Med Tribune , (Aug 11) , 1982. (August 11):3. 5. Conventional blood pressure screening is said to yield errors as often as 50%. Int Med News 1978;11:1,50. 6. Cavenaugh EL: A method for determining costs associated with laboratory error. Am J Public Health 1981;71:831-834.Crossref

Journal

Archives of Internal MedicineAmerican Medical Association

Published: Oct 1, 1983

References