Quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies: No change since STARD statement publication - Before-and-after study

Radiology

Volumn 248, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 817-823

  Wilczynski, Nancy L ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; IMAGE QUALITY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RADIOLOGY DEPARTMENT; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; METHODOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLICATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; STATISTICS;

DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; INTERNATIONALITY; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 51549109382     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2483072067     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA 1999;282:1061-1066.
2. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. Sources of variation and bias in studies of diagnostic accuracy: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2004;140:189-202.
3. Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Di Nisio M, Smidt N, van Rijn JC, Bossuyt PM. Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies. CMAJ 2006;174:469-476.
4. Putnam W, Twohig PL, Burge FI, Jackson LA, Cox JL. A qualitative study of evidence in primary care: what the practitioners are saying. CMAJ 2002;166:1525-1530.
5. 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.
6. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB; Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. The STARD initiative [letter]. Lancet 2003;361:71.
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. Toward complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Fam Pract 2004;21:4-10.
9. 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.
10. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement - quality of reporting of meta-analyses. Lancet 1999;354:1896-1900.
11. Moher D, Jones A, Lepage L; CONSORT Group (Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials). Use of the CONSORT statement and quality of reports of randomized trials: a comparative before-and-after evaluation. JAMA 2001;285:1992-1995.
12. Devereaux PJ, Mannes BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Guyatt GH. The reporting of methodological factors in randomized controlled trials and the association with a journal policy to promote adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist. Control Clin Trials 2002;23:380-388.
13. Smidt N, Rutjes AW, van der Windt AW, et al. Quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 2005;235:347-353.
14. Selman TJ, Khan KS, Mann CH. An evidence-based approach to test accuracy studies in gynecologic oncology: the "STARD" checklist. Gynecol Oncol 2005;96:575-578.
15. Siddiqui MA, Azuara-Blanco A, Burr J. The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in ophthalmic journals. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:261-265.
16. Smidt N, Rutjes AW, van der Windt DA, et al. The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved? Neurology 2006;67:792-797.
17. Coppus SF, van der Veen F, Bossuyt PM, Mol BW. Quality of reporting of test accuracy studies in reproductive medicine: impact of the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) initiative. Fertil Steril 2006;86:1321-1329.
18. Haynes RB, Wilczynski NL. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of diagnosis from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ 2004;328:1040-1042.
19. Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB; Hedges Team. EMBASE search strategies for identifying methodologically sound diagnostic studies for use by clinicians and researchers. BMC Med 2005;3:7.
20. Norman GR, Streiner DL. Biostatistics: the bare essentials. 2nd ed. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: BC Decker, 2000.
21. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE. Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods. 2nd ed. Boston, Mass: PWS-Kent, 1988.
22. Reeves BC. Evidence about evidence. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:253-254.