Talk:Clinical utility of diagnostic tests

Reasons for changings
It is not necessary that a person has symptoms before being tested (f.i. screening tests).

B. The sentence that a good test allows to pick up other test and so on is not relevant in the context where it is explained why pre-test probability influences post-test probability.

Michel soete (talk) 18:31, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Please use in-line citations
I converted the "reference" list to further reading. This list of readings cannot be used as references unless somebody uses wp:inline citations to link each one to its statement. Mikael Häggström (talk) 10:45, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Merge to diagnostic test
I don't see any reason for being a separate article. Mikael Häggström (talk) 10:53, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Responses on the remarks of Mikael Häggström
If you have read the 'further reading' you saw that these articles were the sources of what I wrote. I do'nt think that merging this article in the article 'diagnostic test' is a good idea. I do'nt describe what a diagnostic test is but how it can (should) be used in a diagnostic context.

In America there were very much trials against physicians. This gave rise to concepts as 'evidence based medicine', 'informed consent', shared decision making', in ideal terms a shared good for the physician and for the patient, I guess. It is in that framework of thinking that the article can be read. I am aware that it is written in a way that is too difficult for many, presumably most of patients, but I am convinced that it is written in a much more understandable way for laymen than the article 'Diagnostic test'. This is a secondary reason, so it seems to me, to not merge this article.

Michel soete (talk) 20:00, 13 February 2011 (UTC)