The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: Has it improved?

Neurology

Volumn 67, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 792-797

  Smidt, N ^a,b   Rutjes, A W S ^b   Van Der Windt, D A W M ^a   Ostelo, R W J G ^a   Bossuyt, P M ^b   Reitsma, J B ^b   Bouter, L M ^a   De Vet, H C W ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DISEASE SEVERITY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES; GUIDELINES; HUMANS; PERIODICALS; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 33748678946     PISSN: 00283878     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000238386.41398.30     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomized trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 2005;365:1159-1162.
2. Honest H, Khan KS. Reporting of measures of accuracy in systematic reviews of diagnostic literature. BMC Health Services Research 2002;2:1-4.
3. Pocock SJ, Collier TJ, Dandreo KJ, et al. Issues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice. BMJ 2004;329:883.
4. Begg CB, Cho MK, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996;276:637-639.
5. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG, for the CONSORT Group. The CONSORT Statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:657-662.
6. Altman DG, Schultz KF, Moher D, for the CONSORT Group. The revised CONSORT Statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:663-694.
7. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Clin Chem 2003;49:7-18.
8. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy; the STARD initiative. Clin Chem 2003;49:1-6.
9. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, for the QUOROM group. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet 1999;354:1896-1900.
10. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000;283:2008-2012.
11. Von Elm E, Egger M. The scandal of poor epidemiological research. BMJ 2004;329:868-869.
12. Siddiqui MAR, Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J. The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in ophthalmic journals. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:261-265.
13. Stengel D, Bauwens K, Rademacher G, Mutze S, Ekkernkamp A. Association between compliance with methodological standards of diagnostic research and reported test accuracy: meta-analysis of focused assessment of US for trauma. Radiology 2005;236:102-111.
14. Smidt N, Rutjes AWS, Van der Windt AWM, et al. Quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 2005;235:347-353.
15. Devillé WL, Bezemer PD, Bouter LM. Publications on diagnostic test evaluation in family medicine journals: an optimal search strategy. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:65-69.
16. Holloway RG. Improving the flow of diagnostic information. The importance of STARD for authors and readers. Neurology 2003;61:600-601.
17. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L, for the CONSORT group. Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials. A comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA 2001;285:1992-1995.
18. Reeves BC. Evidence about evidence. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:253-254.
19. Smidt N, Rutjes AWS, Van der Windt DAWM, et al. Reproducibility of the STARD checklist: an instrument to assess the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2006;6:12.
20. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 1999;282:1061-1066.
21. Whiting P, Rutjes AWS, Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Bossuyt PMM, Kleijnen J. Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy. Ann Intern Med 2004;140:189-202.