OBJECTIVE: To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy in order 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 organizations shortened this list during a two-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing a 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 the clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.
OBJECTIVE: To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy in order 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 organizations shortened this list during a two-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing a 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 the clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.
Authors: Subhamoy Pal; Allison L Dauner; Andrea Valks; Brett M Forshey; Kanya C Long; Butsaya Thaisomboonsuk; Gloria Sierra; Victor Picos; Sara Talmage; Amy C Morrison; Eric S Halsey; Guillermo Comach; Chadwick Yasuda; Michael Loeffelholz; Richard G Jarman; Stefan Fernandez; Ung Sam An; Tadeusz J Kochel; Louis E Jasper; Shuenn-Jue L Wu Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Alison Chan; Ioannis Prassas; Apostolos Dimitromanolakis; Randall E Brand; Stefano Serra; Eleftherios P Diamandis; Ivan M Blasutig Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-09-19 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: C Palmieri; M P Caley; K Purshouse; A-V Fonseca; M Rodriguez-Teja; G Kogianni; L Woodley; J Odendaal; K Elliott; J Waxman; J Sturge Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2012-12-20 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Xiaoming Chen; Roland Andersson; William Cs Cho; David Christiani; Richard Coico; Jeffery Drazen; Markus Ege; Thomas Fehniger; Hongwei Gao; Kunlin Jin; Michael N Liebman; Elena Lopez; Giuseppe Marraro; Gyorgy Marko-Varga; Francesco M Marincola; Laurentiu M Popescu; Claudio Spada; Aamir Shahzad; Ena Wang; Wei Wang; Xiangdong Wang; Yong-Xiao Wang; Jinglin Xia; Jia Qu Journal: Clin Transl Med Date: 2012-08-14
Authors: Stefania Mondello; Abayomi Sorinola; Endre Czeiter; Zoltán Vámos; Krisztina Amrein; Anneliese Synnot; Emma Donoghue; János Sándor; Kevin K W Wang; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Ewout W Steyerberg; David K Menon; Andrew I R Maas; Andras Buki Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2018-07-02 Impact factor: 5.269