Guidelines for Conducting Systematic Reviews of Studies Evaluating the Accuracy of Diagnostic Tests

The Evidence Base of Clinical Diagnosis: Theory and methods of diagnostic research: Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 180-212

  Buntinx, Frank ^a,b   Aertgeerts, Bert ^c   Macaskill, Petra ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c The Belgian Centre of Evidence Based Medicine   (Belgium)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Chance adjusted agreement reporting and disagreements by consensus or arbitration; Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL); Data extraction; Degree of heterogeneity between studies measure of differences; Diagnostic and screening tests accuracy evaluation; EMBASE and CENTRAL; Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS); MeSH term use MEDLINE; Modified QUADAS tool and generalizability or applicability of results (spectrum bias); Search strategies and PubMed for MEDLINE; Studies evaluating diagnostic accuracy

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053518557     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1002/9781444300574.ch10     Document Type: Chapter

References (54)

1. Irwig L, Tosteson ANA, Gatsonis C, et al. Guidelines for meta-analyses evaluating diagnostic tests. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:667-76.
2. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA. 1999;282:1061-66.
3. Haynes RB, Wilczynski N, McKibbon KA, et al. Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound studies in Medline. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:447-58.
4. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994;309:1286-91.
5. van der Weijden T, IJzermans CJ, Dinant GJ, et al. Identifying relevant diagnostic studies in MEDLINE: the diagnostic value of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and dipstick as an example. Fam Pract. 1997;14:204-8.
6. Devillé WLJM, Bezemer PD, Bouter LM. Publications on diagnostic test evaluation in family medicine journals: an optimal search strategy. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:65-69.
7. Devillé WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, et al. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002;2(9):1-13.
8. Pai M, McCulloch M, Enanoria W, et al. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test evaluations: What's behind the scenes? ACP J Club. 2004;141(1):A11-13.
9. Jeaschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. User's guidelines to the medical literature: III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test, A: are the results of the study valid? JAMA. 1994;271:389-91.
10. Jeaschke R, Guyatt GH, Sackett DL. User's guidelines to the medical literature: III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test, B: what are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? JAMA. 1994;271:703-7.
11. Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper: papers that report diagnostic or screening tests. BMJ. 1997;315:540-43.
12. Reid MC, Lachs MS, Feinstein AR. Use of methodological standards in diagnostic test research: getting better but still not good. JAMA. 1995;274:645-51.
13. Yusuf S,Wittes J, Probsfield J, et al. Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomised clinical trials. JAMA. 1991;266:93-98.
14. Oxman A, Guyatt G. A consumer's guide to subgroup analysis. Ann Intern Med. 1992;116:78-84.
15. Thompson SG. Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated. BMJ. 1994;309:1351-55.
16. Colditz GA, Burdick E, Mosteller F. Heterogeneity in meta-analysis of data from epidemiologic studies: a commentary. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;142:371-82.
17. Mulrow C, Langhorne P, Grimshaw J. Integrating heterogeneous pieces of evidence in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:989-95.
18. Lijmer JG, Bossuyt PM, Heisterkamp SH. Exploring sources of heterogeneity in systematic reviews of diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1525-37.
19. Littenberg B, Moses LE. Estimating diagnostic accuracy from multiple conflicting reports: a new meta-analytic method. Med Decis Making. 1993;13:313-21.
20. van Houwelingen HC, Zwinderman KH, Stijnen T. A bivariate approach to metaanalysis. Stat Med. 1993;12:2273-84.
21. van Houwelingen HC, Arends LR, Stijnen T. Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Stat Med. 2002;21:589-624.
22. Rutter C, Gatsonis C. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med. 2001;20:2865-84.
23. Dukic V, Gatsonis C. Meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy assessment studies with varying number of thresholds. Biometrics. 2003;59:936-46.
24. Bachmann LM, Coray R, Estermann P, Ter Riet G. Identifying diagnostic studies in MEDLINE: reducing the number needed to read. Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002;9(6):653-58.
25. Haynes 2004 Haynes RB, Wilczynski NL. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of diagnosis from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2004;328(7447):1040.
26. Walter SD, Irwig L, Glasziou PP. Meta-analysis of diagnostic tests with imperfect reference standards. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:943-51.
27. Grégoire G, Derderian F, Le Lorier J. Selecting the language of the publications included in a meta-analysis: is there a Tower of Babel bias? J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:159-63.
28. Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M, et al. Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet. 1997;350(9074):326-29.
29. Obuchowski NA. Sample size calculations in studies of test accuracy. Stat Meth Med Res. 1998;7:371-92.
30. Whiting PF, Weswood ME, Rutjes AW, et al. Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006; 6:9.
31. Aertgeerts B, Buntinx F, Kester A. The value of the CAGE in screening for alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence in general clinical populations: a meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:30-39.
32. Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations. http://cebm.jr2.ox.ac.uk/docs/levels.html
33. Galbraith R. A note on graphical presentation of estimated odds ratios from several clinical trials. Stat Med. 1988;7:889-94.
34. Fleiss JL. The statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Meth Med Res. 1993;2:121-45.
35. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med. 1993;12:1293-316.
36. Buntinx F, Wauters H. The diagnostic value of macroscopic haematuria in diagnosing urological cancers: a meta-analysis. Fam Pract. 1997;14:63-68.
37. Gillatt DA, O'Reilly PM. Haematuria analysed - a prospective study. J. R. Soc. Med. 187;87:115-117.
38. Vainio H, Bianchini F, eds. Breast cancer screening (IARC handbooks of cancer prevention). Vol. 7. Lyon: IARC Press; 2002.
39. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials. 1986;7:177-88.
40. Deeks J. Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests. In: Egger M, Davey-Smith G, Altman D, eds. Systematic reviews in health care: metaanalysis in context. 2nd ed. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2001.
41. Irwig L, Tosteson AN, Gatsonis CA, et al. Guidelines for meta-analyses evaluating diagnostic tests. Ann Int Med. 1994;120:667-76.
42. Irwig L, Macaskill P, Glasziou P, et al. Meta-analytic methods for diagnostic test accuracy. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:119-30.
43. Midgette AS, Stukel TA, Littenberg B. A meta-analytic method for summarizing diagnostic test performances: receiver-operating-characteristic-summary point estimates. Med Decis Making. 1993;13:253-57.
44. Rutter C, and Gatsonis C. Regression methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic test data. Acad Radiol. 1995;2:S48-56.
45. Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AWS, et al. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:982-90.
46. Harbord RM, Egger M, Sterne JA. A modified test for small-study effects in metaanalyses of controlled trials with binary endpoints. StatMed. 2006;25(20):3443-57.
47. SAS Institute. The SAS system for Windows. Version 9.1. Cary (NC): SAS Institute, 2003.
48. Macaskill P. Empirical Bayes estimates generated in a hierarchical summary ROC analysis agreed closely with those of a full Bayesian analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57(9):925-32.
49. Rabe-Hesketh S, Pickles A, Skrondal A. GLLAMM Manual. University of California, Berkeley Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series. Working Paper 160; 2004 Berkeley: University of California; http://www.bepress.com/ucbbiostat/paper160
50. McClish DK. Combining and comparing area estimates across studies or strata. Med Decis Making. 1992;12:274-79.
51. Kester A, Buntinx F. Meta-analysis of ROC-curves. Med Decis Making. 2000;20:430-39.
52. Greenland S. A critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:290-301.
53. Shapiro S. Meta-analysis/Shmeta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:771-77.
54. Oosterhuis WP, Niessen RWLM, Bossuyt PMM. The science of systematic reviewing studies of diagnostic tests. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2000;38:577-88.