OBJECTIVES: The STAndards for Reporting studies of Diagnostic accuracy (STARD) for investigators and editors and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) for reviewers and readers offer guidelines for the quality and reporting of test accuracy studies. These guidelines address and propose some solutions to two major threats to validity: spectrum bias and test review bias. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Using a clinical example, we demonstrate that these solutions fail and propose an alternative solution that concomitantly addresses both sources of bias. We also derive formulas that prove the generality of our arguments. RESULTS: A logical extension of our ideas is to extend STARD item 23 by adding a requirement for multivariable statistical adjustment using information collected in QUADAS items 1, 2, and 12 and STARD items 3-5, 11, 15, and 18. CONCLUSION: We recommend reporting not only variation of diagnostic accuracy across subgroups (STARD item 23) but also the effects of the multivariable adjustments on test performance. We also suggest that the QUADAS be supplemented by an item addressing the appropriateness of statistical methods, in particular whether multivariable adjustments have been included in the analysis.
OBJECTIVES: The STAndards for Reporting studies of Diagnostic accuracy (STARD) for investigators and editors and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) for reviewers and readers offer guidelines for the quality and reporting of test accuracy studies. These guidelines address and propose some solutions to two major threats to validity: spectrum bias and test review bias. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Using a clinical example, we demonstrate that these solutions fail and propose an alternative solution that concomitantly addresses both sources of bias. We also derive formulas that prove the generality of our arguments. RESULTS: A logical extension of our ideas is to extend STARD item 23 by adding a requirement for multivariable statistical adjustment using information collected in QUADAS items 1, 2, and 12 and STARD items 3-5, 11, 15, and 18. CONCLUSION: We recommend reporting not only variation of diagnostic accuracy across subgroups (STARD item 23) but also the effects of the multivariable adjustments on test performance. We also suggest that the QUADAS be supplemented by an item addressing the appropriateness of statistical methods, in particular whether multivariable adjustments have been included in the analysis.
Authors: Martin Umbehr; Lucas M Bachmann; Ulrike Held; Thomas M Kessler; Tullio Sulser; Dominik Weishaupt; John Kurhanewicz; Johann Steurer Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-10-18 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Patrick M Meyer Sauteur; Selina Krautter; Lilliam Ambroggio; Michelle Seiler; Paolo Paioni; Christa Relly; Riccarda Capaul; Christian Kellenberger; Thorsten Haas; Claudine Gysin; Lucas M Bachmann; Annemarie M C van Rossum; Christoph Berger Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2020-10-23 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Judith E Bosmans; Veerle M H Coupé; Bart J Knottnerus; Suzanne E Geerlings; Eric P Moll van Charante; Gerben Ter Riet Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-11-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Livia Faes; Xiaoxuan Liu; Siegfried K Wagner; Dun Jack Fu; Konstantinos Balaskas; Dawn A Sim; Lucas M Bachmann; Pearse A Keane; Alastair K Denniston Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2020-02-12 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Angela E P Bouwmans; Annemarie M M Vlaar; Werner H Mess; Alfons Kessels; Wim E J Weber Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2013-04-02 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Bart J Knottnerus; Patrick J E Bindels; Suzanne E Geerlings; Eric P Moll van Charante; Gerben ter Riet Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2008-12-08 Impact factor: 2.497