Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Annals of Family Medicine
  • My alerts
Annals of Family Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Early Access
    • Multimedia
    • Podcast
    • Collections
    • Past Issues
    • Articles by Subject
    • Articles by Type
    • Supplements
    • Plain Language Summaries
    • Calls for Papers
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Job Seekers
    • Media
  • About
    • Annals of Family Medicine
    • Editorial Staff & Boards
    • Sponsoring Organizations
    • Copyrights & Permissions
    • Announcements
  • Engage
    • Engage
    • e-Letters (Comments)
    • Subscribe
    • Podcast
    • E-mail Alerts
    • Journal Club
    • RSS
    • Annals Forum (Archive)
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Follow annalsfm on Twitter
  • Visit annalsfm on Facebook
Meeting ReportResearch methodology and instrument development

Development of a framework for transferring tests evaluated in secondary care to primary care settings: a Delphi study

Natasja Vijfschagt, Michiel de Boer, Huibert Burger, Marco Blanker, Mariska Leeflang, Gea Holtman and Jochen Cals
The Annals of Family Medicine November 2024, 22 (Supplement 1) 6314; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.22.s1.6314
Natasja Vijfschagt
MSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michiel de Boer
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Huibert Burger
MD,PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marco Blanker
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mariska Leeflang
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gea Holtman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jochen Cals
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Context: It takes an average of nine years to develop new diagnostic tests. These tests are primarily evaluated in secondary care (SC) before they are introduced into primary care (PC). Test evaluation in PC is costly and time-intensive. Transferring diagnostic tests from SC to PC however, is hindered by factors such as variation in sensitivity and specificity between settings.

Objective: To achieve consensus on prioritizing criteria for selecting tests that are used in SC and not yet in PC, but that have clinical potential in PC.

Study Design and Analysis: This Delph study comprises two rounds of feedback and input from a panel of diverse experts: clinicians, methodologists and test developers. A preliminary list with prioritizing criteria was developed by the steering group, based on a non-systematic literature search and expert opinion. Panelists rated the proposed criteria for inclusion on a five-point Likert Scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree), followed by general questions for feedback and input, reflecting a comprehensive approach. Consensus was determined at 70% agreement. Criteria were categorized as inclusion, exclusion, or reassessment for the subsequent round based on feedback and agreement levels.

Setting or Dataset: Primary care.

Population Studied: General practitioners (GP’s), test developers, specialists in SC, and methodologists from in- and outside the Netherlands.

Intervention/Instrument: Questionnaires in RedCap.

Outcome Measures: Consensus on prioritizing criteria.

Results: The preliminary list consists of several parts and themes. The first part asks future users to describe the diagnostic situation, e.g. the target patient population, differential diagnoses and potential for improvement in the diagnostic pathway. This is followed by the themes with the criteria to be rated. The proposed themes are “Burden” (e.g. epidemiology and costs), “Clinical Pathway,” (e.g. test role and potential) “Clinical Performance” (e.g. sensitivity and added value), “Impact” (e.g. improving management), and “Feasibility” (e.g. safety and support). The final list will be available this summer.

Conclusions: Based on the results of this Delphi study, we will develop a framework that researchers can use to prioritize tests used in SC that have clinical potential in PC. GPs and their patients will benefit from earlier availability of suitable tests, positively impacting the diagnostic pathway and thereby improving clinical management in PC

  • © 2024 Annals of Family Medicine, Inc. For the private, noncommercial use of one individual user of the Web site. All other rights reserved.
Previous
Back to top

In this issue

The Annals of Family Medicine: 22 (Supplement 1)
The Annals of Family Medicine: 22 (Supplement 1)
Vol. 22, Issue Supplement 1
20 Nov 2024
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Annals of Family Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Development of a framework for transferring tests evaluated in secondary care to primary care settings: a Delphi study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Annals of Family Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Annals of Family Medicine web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
20 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Development of a framework for transferring tests evaluated in secondary care to primary care settings: a Delphi study
Natasja Vijfschagt, Michiel de Boer, Huibert Burger, Marco Blanker, Mariska Leeflang, Gea Holtman, Jochen Cals
The Annals of Family Medicine Nov 2024, 22 (Supplement 1) 6314; DOI: 10.1370/afm.22.s1.6314

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Get Permissions
Share
Development of a framework for transferring tests evaluated in secondary care to primary care settings: a Delphi study
Natasja Vijfschagt, Michiel de Boer, Huibert Burger, Marco Blanker, Mariska Leeflang, Gea Holtman, Jochen Cals
The Annals of Family Medicine Nov 2024, 22 (Supplement 1) 6314; DOI: 10.1370/afm.22.s1.6314
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Differential Adoption of a New Approach to Weight Management in Primary Care
  • Utility of comics to support member-checking in realist evaluation
  • Reliability and Validity of a Comprehensiveness of Care Measure in Primary Care, A Case Study of the PRIME Registry
Show more Research methodology and instrument development

Similar Articles

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Early Access
  • Plain-Language Summaries
  • Multimedia
  • Podcast
  • Articles by Type
  • Articles by Subject
  • Supplements
  • Calls for Papers

Info for

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Job Seekers
  • Media

Engage

  • E-mail Alerts
  • e-Letters (Comments)
  • RSS
  • Journal Club
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Subscribe
  • Family Medicine Careers

About

  • About Us
  • Editorial Board & Staff
  • Sponsoring Organizations
  • Copyrights & Permissions
  • Contact Us
  • eLetter/Comments Policy

© 2025 Annals of Family Medicine