Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative

被引:62
作者
Bossuyt, PM
Reitsma, JB
Bruns, DE
Gatsonis, CA
Glasziou, PP
Irwig, LM
Lijmer, JG
Moher, D
Rennie, D
de Vet, HCW
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Brown Univ, Ctr Stat Sci, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[3] Univ Queensland, Sch Populat Hlth, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[4] Univ Sydney, Dept Publ Hlth & Community Med, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[5] Chalmers Res Grp, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[6] Journal Amer Med Assoc, Chicago, IL USA
[7] Free Univ Amsterdam, Inst Res Extramural Med, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
10.1515/CCLM.2003.012
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Objective To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy, to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in the study and to evaluate its generalisability. Methods The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a two-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy. Results The search for published guidelines regarding diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. At the consensus meeting, participants shortened the list to 25 items, using evidence on bias whenever available. A prototypical flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation, the reference standard or both. Conclusions Evaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the checklist and the flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.
引用
收藏
页码:68 / 73
页数:6
相关论文
共 19 条
[12]   Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests [J].
Lijmer, JG ;
Mol, BW ;
Heisterkamp, S ;
Bonsel, GJ ;
Prins, MH ;
van der Meulen, JHP ;
Bossuyt, PMM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1999, 282 (11) :1061-1066
[13]   BASIC PRINCIPLES OF ROC ANALYSIS [J].
METZ, CE .
SEMINARS IN NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 1978, 8 (04) :283-298
[14]   Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials - A comparative before-and-after evaluation [J].
Moher, D ;
Jones, A ;
Lepage, L .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2001, 285 (15) :1992-1995
[15]   The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials [J].
Moher, D ;
Schulz, KF ;
Altman, D .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2001, 285 (15) :1987-1991
[16]   Peripheral arterial disease: Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of MR angiography [J].
Nelemans, PJ ;
Leiner, T ;
de Vet, HCW ;
van Engelshoven, JMA .
RADIOLOGY, 2000, 217 (01) :105-114
[17]   WORKUP BIAS IN PREDICTION RESEARCH [J].
PANZER, RJ ;
SUCHMAN, AL ;
GRINER, PF .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1987, 7 (02) :115-119
[18]   USE OF METHODOLOGICAL STANDARDS IN DIAGNOSTIC-TEST RESEARCH - GETTING BETTER BUT STILL NOT GOOD [J].
REID, MC ;
LACHS, MS ;
FEINSTEIN, AR .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1995, 274 (08) :645-651
[19]  
SACKETT DL, 1991, CLIN EPIDEMIOLOGY, P47