The quality of reporting of primary test accuracy studies in obstetrics and gynaecology: Application of the STARD criteria

BMC Women's Health

Volumn 11, Issue , 2011, Pages

  Selman, Tara J ^a   Morris, R Katie ^a   Zamora, Javier ^b   Khan, Khalid S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b HOSPITAL RAMÓN Y CAJAL   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHECKLIST; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; GYNECOLOGY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; OBSTETRICS; QUALITY CONTROL; SAMPLE SIZE; STANDARDS FOR REPORTING OF DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY CRITERIA; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGICAL EXAMINATION; HUMAN; LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; STANDARD;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CHECKLIST; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OBSTETRICAL AND GYNECOLOGICAL; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; FEMALE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HUMANS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 79953110930     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726874     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6874-11-8     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Deeks J, Morris J. Evaluating diagnostic tests. Baillieres Clinical Obsetrics and Gynaecology. 1996, 10:613-630.
2. Honest H, Khan KS. Reporting of measures of accuracy in systematic reviews of diagnostic literature. BMC Health Services Research 2002, 2:4. 10.1186/1472-6963-2-4, 100326, 11884248.
3. Khan KS, Bakour SH, Bossuyt PM. Evidence-based obstetric and gynaecologic diagnosis: the STARD checklist for authors, peer-reviewers and readers of test accuracy studies. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 2004, 111(7):638-640.
4. Selman T, Khan K, Mann C. An evidence based approach to test accuracy studies in gynecologic onlcology: the STARD checklist. Gynecologic Oncology 2005, 96:575-578. 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.09.053, 15721396.
5. Chien P, Khan K. Evaluation of clinical test II: assessment of validity. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2001, 108(6):568-572. 10.1016/S0306-5456(00)00128-5, 11426889.
6. Moher D. CONSORT: an evolving tool to help improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials. Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials. JAMA 1998, 279:1489-91. 10.1001/jama.279.18.1489, 9600488.
7. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, Lijmer JG, Moher D, Rennie D, de Vet HC. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. BMJ 2003, 326(7379):41-44. 10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41, 1124931, 12511463.
8. Coppus S, van der Veen F, Bossuyt P, Mol B. 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(5):1321-1329. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.03.050, 16978620.
9. Smidt N, Rutjes A, van der Windt D, Ostelo R, Bossuyt P, Reitsma J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved?. Neurology 2006, 67(5):792-797. 10.1212/01.wnl.0000238386.41398.30, 16966539.
10. Zafar A, Khan G, Siddiqui M. The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies in diabetic retinopathy screening: a systematic review. Clin Experiment Opthalmol 2008, 36(6):537-542.
11. Rama K, Poovali S, Apsingi S. Quality of reporting of orthopaedic diagnostic accuracy studies is suboptimal. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006, 447:237-246. 10.1097/01.blo.0000205906.44103.a3, 16523118.
12. Gomez N, Hernandez-Aguado I, Lumbreras B. Evaluation of the diagnostic research methodology in Spain after STARD publication. Med Clin (Barc) 2009, 133(8):302-310. 10.1016/j.medcli.2008.10.043, 19237177.
13. Selman T, Zamora J, Mann C, Appleyard TL, Khan K. Diagnostic accuracy of tests for lymph node status in primary cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2008, 178(7):855-862. 10.1503/cmaj.071124, 2267838, 18362381.
14. Selman T, Mann C, Zamora J, Khan K. A systematic review of tests for lymph node status in primary endometrial cancer. BMC Women's Health 2008, 8(8).
15. Selman T, Luesley D, Acheson N, Khan K, Mann C. A systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests for inguinal lymph node status in vulval cancer. Gynecologic Oncology 2005, 99(1):206-214. 10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.05.029, 16081147.
16. Morris RK, Cnossen J, Langejans M, Robson S, Kleijnen J, ter Riet G, Mol BW, van der Post JAM, Khan KS. Serum screening with Down's Syndrome markers to predict pre-eclampsia and small for gestational age: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2008, 8(1):33. 10.1186/1471-2393-8-33, 2533288, 18680570.
17. Cnossen J, Morris RK, Mol BW, ter RG, van der Post JAM, Coomarasamy A, Zwindermann AH, Bindels P, Robson SC, Kleijnen J, Khan KS. Uterine artery Doppler to predict fetal growth restriction: a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2008, 178(6):701-711. 10.1503/cmaj.070430, 2263112, 18332385.
18. Falagas M, Michalopoulos A, Bliziotis I, Sotereiades E. A bibliometric analysis by geographic area of published research in several biomedical fields, 1995-2003. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2006, 175(11):1389-1390. 10.1503/cmaj.060361, 1635765, 17116906.
19. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes R, Altman DG. Emperical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995, 273(408):412.