HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sunshine, J. H. Articles by Applegate, K. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Sunshine, J. H. Articles by Applegate, K. E.

Technology Assessment for Radiologists¹

¹ From the Department of Research, American College of Radiology, 1891 Preston White Dr, Reston, VA 20191 (J.H.S.); Riley Hospital for Children, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis (K.E.A.); and Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yale University, New Haven, Conn (J.H.S.). Received August 10, 2003; revision requested August 19; revision received and accepted August 21. Address correspondence to J.H.S. (e-mail: jonathans@acr.org).

Health technology assessment is the systematic and quantitative evaluation of the safety, efficacy, and cost of health care interventions. This article outlines aspects of technology assessment of diagnostic imaging. First, it presents a conceptual framework of a hierarchy of levels of efficacy that should guide thinking about imaging test evaluation. In particular, the framework shows how the question answered by most evaluations of imaging tests, "How well does this test distinguish disease from the nondiseased state?" relates to the fundamental questions for all health technology assessment, "How much does this intervention improve the health of people?" and "What is the cost of that improvement?" Second, it describes decision analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis, which are quantitative modeling techniques usually used to answer the two core questions for imaging. Third, it outlines design and operational considerations that are vital if researchers who are conducting an experimental study are to make a quality contribution to technology assessment, either directly through their findings or as an input into decision analyses. Finally, it includes a separate discussion of screening—that is, the application of diagnostic tests to nonsymptomatic populations—because the requirements for good screening tests are different from those for diagnostic tests of symptomatic patients and because the appropriate evaluation methods also differ.

© RSNA, 2004

Index terms: Cancer screening • Efficacy study • Radiology and radiologists, outcomes studies • Technology assessment

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. T. Sica Bias in Research Studies Radiology, March 1, 2006; 238(3): 780 - 789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. Hollingworth Radiology Cost and Outcomes Studies: Standard Practice and Emerging Methods Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2005; 185(4): 833 - 839. [Full Text] [PDF]