The assessment of the quality of reporting of meta-analyses in diagnostic research: A systematic review

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 11, Issue , 2011, Pages

  Willis, Brian H ^a   Quigley, Muireann ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH; REVIEW; STANDARD;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH REPORT;

EID: 83055181946     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-163     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Guidelines for conducting systematic reviews of studies evaluating the accuracy of diagnostic tests. Buntinx F, Aertgeerts B, Macaskill P, The evidence base for clinical diagnosis: theory and methods of diagnostic research London: BMJ books, Knottnerus JA, Buntix F, 2 2009 180 212
2. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Leeflang M, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, Bossuyt PMM, Ann Intern Med 2008 149 889 897 19075208
3. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH, J Clin Epidemiol 2005 58 982 90 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 16168343 (Pubitemid 41316441)
4. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA, Stat Med 2001 20 2865 2884 10.1002/sim.942 11568945 (Pubitemid 32923212)
5. Publication and related biases. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ, Health Technol Assess 2000 4 10
6. Chapter 3, Problems and limitations in conducting systematic reviews. Egger M, Dickersin K, Smith GD, Systematic reviews in healthcare, BMJ books London, Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG, 2 2001 43 68
7. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Stat Med 2002 21 11 1539 1559 10.1002/sim.1186 12111919 (Pubitemid 34746062)
8. Why and how sources of heterogeneity should be investigated. Thompson SG, Systematic reviews in healthcare, BMJ books, Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG, 2 2001 157 175
9. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines. Deville W, Butinx F, Bouter LM, Montori VM, de Vet HCW, van der Windt DAWM, Bezemer PR, BMC Medical Research Methodology 2002 2 9 10.1186/1471-2288-2-9 12097142
10. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, Lijmer JG, Moher D, Rennie D, de Vet HC, BMJ 2003 326 7379 41 4 10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41 12511463 (Pubitemid 36110721)
11. Chapter 9: Assessing methodological quality. Reitsma JB, Rutjes AWS, Whiting P, Vlassov VV, Leeflang MMG, Deeks JJ, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Version 1.0.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PM, Gatsonis C, 2009 Available from: http://srdta.cochrane. org/
12. Development and validation of methods for assessing the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. Whiting P, Rutjes AWS, Dinnes J, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PMM, Kleijnen J, Health Technol Assess 2004 8 25
13. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF, Lancet 1999 354 1896 900 10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04149-5 10584742
14. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D, PLOS Medicine 2009 6 7 1000100 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 19621070
15. Challenges in Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Technologies. Tatsioni A, Zarin DA, Aronson N, Samson DJ, Flamm CR, Schmid C, Lau J, Ann Intern Med 2005 142 1048 1055 15968029 (Pubitemid 40847707)
16. Uptake of newer methodological developments and the deployment of meta-analysis in diagnostic test research: a systematic review. Willis and Quigley, BMC Medical Research Methodology 2011 11 27 10.1186/1471-2288-11-27 21401947
17. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and UK Cochrane Centre Search Filters Design Group. Developing efficient search strategies to identify reports of adverse effects in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Golder S, McIntosh HM, Duffy S, Glanville J, Health Information and Libraries Journal 2006 23 3 12 17206991
18. Systematic reviews of test accuracy should search a range of databases to identify primary studies Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. Whiting P, Westwood M, Burke M, Sterne J, Glanville J, 2008 61 357 364
19. Epidemiological Studies. Morris JA, Gardner MJ, Statistics with confidence London: BMJ books, Altman D, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner M, 2 2001 57 67
20. The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. Hopewell S, Dutton S, Yu LM, Chan AW, Altman DG, BMJ 2010 340 723 10.1136/bmj.c723 20332510
21. Statistical methods in medical research. Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS, Oxford, UK: Blackwell 4 2002 134 137
22. A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales. Cohen J, Educ Psychol Meas 1960 20 37 46 10.1177/001316446002000104
23. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons 3 2003 598 622
24. The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Landis JR, Koch GG, Biometrics 1977 33 1 159 174 10.2307/2529310 843571 (Pubitemid 8054849)
25. Health technology assessment: history and demand. Stevens A, Milne R, Burls A, J Pub Hlth Med 2003 25 98 101 (Pubitemid 36758770)
26. [O13] Survey of diagnostic test meta-analyses. Schmid C, Chung M, Chew P, Lau J, 12th Cochrane Colloquium Ottawa 2004
27. An observational study found that authors of randomised controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods. Devereaux PJ, Choi PT, El-Dika S, Bhandari M, Montori VM, Schunemann HJ, Garg AX, Busse JW, Heels-Ansdell D, Ghali WA, Manns BJ, Guyatt GH, J Clin Epidemiol 2004 57 1232 6 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.017 15617948 (Pubitemid 40023142)
28. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Daniels S, Kumar A, Scott C, Swann S, Djulbegovic B, BMJ 2004 328 22 4 10.1136/bmj.328.7430.22 14703540 (Pubitemid 38067738)
29. Discrepancies in sample size calculations and data analyses reported in randomised trials: comparison of publications with protocols. Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Jorgensen KJ, Gotzsche PC, Altman DG, BMJ 2008 337 2299 10.1136/bmj.a2299 19056791
30. Comparison of descriptions of allocation concealment in trial protocols and the published reports: cohort study. Pildal J, Chan AW, Hrobjartsson A, Forfang E, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, BMJ 2005 330 1049 10.1136/bmj.38414.422650.8F 15817527 (Pubitemid 40646553)
31. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B, Stat Med 1993 12 14 1293 316 10.1002/sim.4780121403 8210827 (Pubitemid 23230833)
32. Estimating diagnostic accuracy from multiple conflicting reports: a new meta-analytic method. Littenberg B, Moses LE, Med decis Making 1993 13 313 321 10.1177/0272989X9301300408 8246704 (Pubitemid 24013154)
33. A bivariate approach to meta-analysis. Van Houwelingen HC, Zwinderman KH, Stijnen T, Statist Med 1993 12 2273 2284 10.1002/sim.4780122405 (Pubitemid 24007148)
34. Foreword. Chalmers I, Altman D, Systematic Reviews London: BMJ Publishing Group, Chalmers I, Altman D, 1995
35. Chapter 1: Introduction. Green S, Higgins JPT, Alderson P, Clarke M, Mulrow CD, Oxman AD, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1 (updated September 2008). The Cochrane Collaboration, Higgins JPT, Green S, 2008 Available from http://www.cochrane-handbook.org