0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Comment & Response |

Heterogeneity in Meta-analysis of FDG-PET Studies to Diagnose Lung Cancer

Edward J. Mills, PhD, MSc, MSt1; Jeroen P. Jansen, PhD2; Steve Kanters, MSc3
[+] Author Affiliations
1Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University, Stanford, California
2Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts
3School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
JAMA. 2015;313(4):419. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.16482.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Extract

To the Editor Dr Deppen and colleagues1 conducted a large meta-analysis that showed the limitations of lung cancer diagnosis using fludeoxyglucose F 18 combined with positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in areas with endemic infectious lung disease. Although the sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET diagnosis was heterogeneous across the included studies, thereby compromising interpretation of the pooled results, the relevance of presenting an I2 statistic to underscore and interpret the extent of the heterogeneity should be questioned.

Topics

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

References

January 27, 2015
Jeffrey D. Blume, PhD; Stephen A. Deppen, PhD; Eric L. Grogan, MD, MPH
1Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
2Department of Thoracic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
JAMA. 2015;313(4):419-420. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.16485.
CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

631 Views
0 Citations
×

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();