Systematic reviews of diagnostic research. Considerations about assessment and incorporation of methodological quality

被引:14
作者
de Vet, HCW [1 ]
van der Weijden, T [1 ]
Muris, JWM [1 ]
Heyrman, J [1 ]
Buntinx, F [1 ]
Knottnerus, JA [1 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Med Ctr, Inst Res Extramural Med, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
diagnosis; diagnostic tests; meta-analysis; methodological quality; systematic review; validity;
D O I
10.1023/A:1012751326462
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
The aim of this paper is to provide a theoretical background for performing and reading systematic reviews of diagnostic studies. We first discuss items for assessment of methodological quality in diagnostic studies and then present methods on how to incorporate these quality measures in systematic reviews. The items of internal validity determine whether the presented results of the individual studies are unbiased and can be trusted. Items of external validity determine to what extent the results are applicable outside the population in which the study was performed. The issues concern the adequacy of the study population, the performance and interpretation of the diagnostic tests and the presentation of the results. Several methods exist for incorporation of issues of methodological quality into systematic reviews, such as subgroup analyses, meta-regression analysis, and methodological scores. Publications of diagnostic studies should provide sufficient information to enable assessment of the methodological quality. Furthermore, publication of results of subgroup analyses should be promoted. Methodological criteria lists might help to improve the quality of systematic reviews of diagnostic research. With the items of methodological quality in mind the general practitioner might be better equipped to critically read and interpret diagnostic reviews.
引用
收藏
页码:301 / 306
页数:6
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   BIASES IN THE ASSESSMENT OF DIAGNOSTIC-TESTS [J].
BEGG, CB .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 1987, 6 (04) :411-423
[2]  
DEVILLE WL, 2001, EVIDENCE BASE DIAGNO
[3]   ANALYSIS OF PROBABILITY AS AN AID IN THE CLINICAL-DIAGNOSIS OF CORONARY-ARTERY DISEASE [J].
DIAMOND, GA ;
FORRESTER, JS .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1979, 300 (24) :1350-1358
[4]   How to read a paper - Papers that report diagnostic or screening tests [J].
Greenhalgh, T .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1997, 315 (7107) :540-543
[5]   INVITED COMMENTARY - A CRITICAL-LOOK AT SOME POPULAR METAANALYTIC METHODS [J].
GREENLAND, S .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1994, 140 (03) :290-296
[6]   RETHINKING SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY [J].
HLATKY, MA ;
MARK, DB ;
HARRELL, FE ;
LEE, KL ;
CALIFF, RM ;
PRYOR, DB .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 1987, 59 (12) :1195-1198
[7]   The diagnostic value of digital rectal examination in primary care screening for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis [J].
Hoogendam, A ;
Buntinx, F ;
de Vet, HCW .
FAMILY PRACTICE, 1999, 16 (06) :621-626
[8]   METAANALYTIC METHODS FOR DIAGNOSTIC-TEST ACCURACY [J].
IRWIG, L ;
MACASKILL, P ;
GLASZIOU, P ;
FAHEY, M .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1995, 48 (01) :119-130
[9]   USERS GUIDES TO THE MEDICAL LITERATURE .3. HOW TO USE AN ARTICLE ABOUT A DIAGNOSTIC-TEST .A. ARE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY VALID [J].
JAESCHKE, R ;
GUYATT, G ;
SACKETT, DL .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1994, 271 (05) :389-391
[10]   USERS GUIDES TO THE MEDICAL LITERATURE .3. HOW TO USE AN ARTICLE ABOUT A DIAGNOSTIC-TEST .B. WHAT ARE THE RESULTS AND WILL THEY HELP ME IN CARING FOR MY PATIENTS [J].
JAESCHKE, R ;
GUYATT, GH ;
SACKETT, DL ;
GUYATT, G ;
BASS, E ;
BRILLEDWARDS, P ;
BROWMAN, G ;
COOK, D ;
FARKOUH, M ;
GERSTEIN, H ;
HAYNES, B ;
HAYWARD, R ;
HOLBROOK, A ;
JUNIPER, E ;
LEE, H ;
LEVINE, M ;
MOYER, V ;
NISHIKAWA, J ;
OXMAN, A ;
PATEL, A ;
PHILBRICK, J ;
RICHARDSON, WS ;
SAUVE, S ;
SACKETT, D ;
SINCLAIR, J ;
TROUT, KS ;
TUGWELL, P ;
TUNIS, S ;
WALTER, S ;
WILSON, M .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1994, 271 (09) :703-707