Toward complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The stard initiative

Academic Radiology

Volumn 10, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 664-669

  Bossuyt, Patrick M ^a   Reitsma, Johannes B ^a   Bruns, David E ^b   Gatsonis, Constantine A ^c   Glasziou, Paul P ^g   Irwig, Les M ^d   Lijmer, Jeroen G ^a   Moher, David ^e   Rennie, Drummond ^f   De Vet, Henrica C W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^c BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^e Chalmers Research Group   (Canada)

^f AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION   (United States)

^g Free University ^*

Author keywords

Diagnostic radiology; Radiology and radiologists; Research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; PUBLICATION; RADIOLOGIST; REFERENCE VALUE; STANDARD;

EID: 12444339905     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80086-7     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Guyatt GH, Tugwell PX, Feeny DH, Haynes RB, Drummond M. A framework for clinical evaluation of diagnostic technologies. Can Med Assoc J 1986; 134:587-594.
2. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991; 11:88-94.
3. Kent DL, Larson EB. Disease, level of impact, and quality of research methods: three dimensions of clinical efficacy assessment applied to magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 1992; 27:245-254.
4. Griner PF, Mayewski RJ, Mushlin Al, Greenland P. Selection and interpretation of diagnostic tests and procedures: principles and applications. Ann Intern Med 1981; 94:557-592.
5. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. The selection of diagnostic tests. In: Sackett D, ed. Clinical epidemiology. 2nd ed. Boston, Mass: Little, Brown, 1991; 47-57.
6. Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978; 8:283-298.
7. Reid MC, Lachs MS, Feinstein AR. Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research: getting better but still not good. JAMA 1995; 274:645-651.
8. Nelemans PJ, Leiner T, de Vet HCW, van Engelshoven JMA. Peripheral arterial disease: meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of MR angiography. Radiology 2000; 217:105-114.
9. Devries SO, Hunink MGM, Polak JF. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves as a technique for meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of duplex ultrasonography in peripheral arterial disease. Acad Radiol 1996; 3:361-369.
10. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 1999; 282:1061-1066.
11. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276:637-639.
12. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 2001; 285:1987-1991.
13. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA 2001; 285:1992-1995.
14. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA 1997; 277:927-934.
15. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134:663-694.
16. Egger M, Jüni P, Barlett C. Value of flow diagrams in reports of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2001; 285:1996-1999.
17. Knottnerus JA. The effects of disease verification and referral on the relationship between symptoms and diseases. Med Decis Making 1987; 7:139-148.
18. Panzer RJ, Suchman AL, Griner PF, Workup bias in prediction research. Med Decis Making 1987; 7:115-119.
19. Begg CB, Biases in the assessment of diagnostic tests. Stat Med 1987; 6:411-423.