Literature DB >> 16464428

[Diagnostic (STARD) and prognostic (REMARK) studies].

Douglas G Altman1, Patrick Mm Bossuyt.   

Abstract

Deficiencies in how research studies are reported are both well-documented and widespread across all medical specialties and study designs. Although randomised trials have received the most attention in this regard, similar concerns have been expressed about reporting of other types of research including diagnostic and epidemiological studies. If a journal article describes in enough detail what was done at each stage of a study, readers will have enough information to allow them to decide on the merits of the results for themselves. From this simple idea comes the scientific rationale of developing guidelines on how to report research. Recommended processes to produce reporting guidelines have evolved over several years during the preparation of a sequence of reporting guidelines starting with CONSORT and QUOROM in the 1990s. We describe initiatives to develop reporting guidelines for diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) and tumour marker prognostic studies (REMARK).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16464428     DOI: 10.1016/s0025-7753(05)72210-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Clin (Barc)        ISSN: 0025-7753            Impact factor:   1.725


  2 in total

1.  An evidence-base for laboratory endocrinology?

Authors:  Julian H Barth
Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev       Date:  2008-08

2.  [Diagnostic yield in benign anal disease in primary care].

Authors:  Pablo Alonso-Coello; Javier Zamora Romero; David Rigau Comas; Rafael Rotaeche del Campo
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2009-09-09       Impact factor: 1.137

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.