Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Clinicians should interpret AKI biomarker discordance cautiously versus creatinine; leaves open need for improved reference standards in validation studies.
BACKGROUND: Serum creatinine has been used as the diagnostic test for acute kidney injury (AKI) for decades despite having imperfect sensitivity and specificity. Novel tubular injury biomarkers may revolutionize the diagnosis of AKI; however, even if a novel tubular injury biomarker is 100% sensitive and 100% specific, it may appear inaccurate when using serum creatinine as the gold standard. CONCLUSIONS: In general, the apparent diagnostic performance of a biomarker depends not only on its ability to detect injury but also on disease prevalence and the sensitivity and specificity of the imperfect gold standard. Apparent errors in diagnosis using a new biomarker may be a reflection of errors in the imperfect gold standard itself rather than poor performance of the biomarker.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Waikar et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: