Integrating physician’s and patient’s interest before judging the efficiency of a diagnostic test

Ram Shanmugam


Background: Customarily, physicians utilize an efficient diagnostic test before confirming the illness to start a treatment procedure. In this process, physician’s seeks maximum possible sensitivity  and specificity. On the contrary, patient wants maximum attainable positive and negative predictive values. A duality exists between both vital patient’s and physician’s interest and it helps to judge whether a diagnostic is superior.

Methods: This article integrates physician’s and patient’s interest in a novel manner to judge a diagnostic test is efficient. This approach is seen to be optimal, according to illustrations.

Results: The results based on expressions of this article in data on rotavirus, mammogram, post-surgery infection, opinion of two independent nurses about ear infection, whether a surgery contained cancer cells, whether a second surgery rectifies ruptures in breast gels, and whether the elder’s fall due to medications they consumed are all convincing that the integration works well.

Conclusions: The new integrated metric, , susceptibility index, excessive risk, calibration index, and phi-coefficients of this article are supportive to that both the physician’s and patient’s interest together identify a superior diagnostic test.


Positive and negative Predictive Values, Prevalence, Sensitivity, Specificity, Shanmugam, Metrics Youden versus

Full Text:



Shanmugam R. Double anchored syllogism for medical scenarios. J. Stat. Appli. 2008;3:186-206.

Shanmugam R. A tutorial about diagnostic methodology with dementia data. International J Data Analysis Techniques Strategies. 2009;1(4): 385-406.

Shanmugam R. Mosaic masonries to interpret diagnostic test results. Am. Med. J. 2013 Jan 1;4:12-20.

Taube A. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values: a graphical approach. Statistics Med. 1986 Nov;5(6):585-91.

Zhou XH, McClish DK, Obuchowski NA. Statistical methods in diagnostic medicine. John Wiley and Sons; 2009.

Le CT. 2003. Introductory Biostatistics. 1st Edition. Hoboken, John Wiley and Sons; 2003:552.

Agresti, A. An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis. 2nd Edition, Hoboken, New Jersey: Gainesville, Florida. Wiley-Interscience; 2007.

Brown SL, Pennello G. Replacement surgery and silicone gel breast implant rupture: self-report by women after mammoplasty. J Womens Health Gend Based Med. 2002 Apr;11(3):255-64.

Vieira CPB, Rocha ACS, Carvalho GMA, Sales JCS, Araujo Luz MHB, Figueiredo MLF. Risk factors associated with falls in elderly. J Nursing UFPE online. 2016;10(11):4028-35.

Amiri AM, Armano G. Early diagnosis of heart disease using classification and regression trees. International Conference on Nueral Networks; 2013:1-4.

Torelli J, Ryan G. Beyond Cholesterol: 7 life saving heart disease tests that your doctor may not give you. Lynn Sonberg Books, New York, ISBN: 2005;10:0312348630.

Mendis S, Puska P. Norrving B. Global Atlas on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Control; World Health Organization in collaboration with the World Heart Federation and the World Stroke Organization; 2011:3-18.

Calderon A, Pérez A, Valente J. ECG feature extraction and ventricular fibrillation (VF) prediction using data mining techniques. In 2019 IEEE 32nd International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems (CBMS). 2019 Jun 5;14-19.

Soleimani P, Neshati A. Applying the Regression Technique for Prediction of the Acute Heart Attack. World Academy Sci, Engineering Technol, Internat J Medical, Health, Biomedical, Bioengineering Pharmaceut Engineering. 2015 Sep 2;9(11):767-71.

Polaraju K, Prasad DD. Prediction of heart disease using multiple linear regression model. Internat J Engineering Develop Resea. 2017;5(4):1419-25.

Tripoliti EE, Papadopoulos TG, Karanasiou GS, Naka KK, Fotiadis DI. Heart failure: diagnosis, severity estimation and prediction of adverse events through machine learning techniques. Computational Structural Biotechnol J. 2017 Jan 1;15:26-47.