Reported estimates of diagnostic accuracy in ophthalmology conference abstracts were not associated with full-text publication

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 79, Issue , 2016, Pages 96-103

  Korevaar, Daniël A ^a   Cohen, Jérémie F ^a,b   Spijker, René ^a,c   Saldanha, Ian J ^d   Dickersin, Kay ^d   Virgili, Gianni ^e   Hooft, Lotty ^c   Bossuyt, Patrick M M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b PARIS DESCARTES UNIVERSITY   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF FLORENCE   (Italy)

Author keywords

Diagnostic accuracy studies; Meta analyses; Ophthalmology; Publication bias; Reporting bias; Sensitivity and specificity; Systematic reviews; Time lag bias

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FULL TEXT DATABASE; GERMANY; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; OPHTHALMOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLISHING; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; DOCUMENTATION; ORGANIZATION; PEER REVIEW; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING AS TOPIC; CONGRESSES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; OPHTHALMOLOGY; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PUBLICATION BIAS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 85003481031     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.06.002     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. [1] Schmucker, C., Schell, L.K., Portalupi, S., Oeller, P., Cabrera, L., Bassler, D., et al. Extent of non-publication in cohorts of studies approved by research ethics committees or included in trial registries. PLoS One, 9, 2014, e114023.
2. [2] Scherer, R.W., Langenberg, P., von, E.E., Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2007, MR000005.
3. [3] Hua, F., Walsh, T., Glenny, A.M., Worthington, H., Thirty percent of abstracts presented at dental conferences are published in full: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 75 (2016), 16–28.
4. [4] Dwan, K., Gamble, C., Williamson, P.R., Kirkham, J.J., Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias - an updated review. PLoS One, 8, 2013, e66844.
5. [5] Dickersin, K., The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA 263 (1990), 1385–1389.
6. [6] Song, F., Parekh-Bhurke, S., Hooper, L., Loke, Y.K., Ryder, J.J., Sutton, A.J., et al. Extent of publication bias in different categories of research cohorts: a meta-analysis of empirical studies. BMC Med Res Methodol, 9, 2009, 79.
7. [7] Sterne, J.A.C., Egger, M., Moher, D., Chapter 10: addressing reporting biases. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0, 2011, The Cochrane Collaboration.
8. [8] Chan, A.W., Song, F., Vickers, A., Jefferson, T., Dickersin, K., Gotzsche, P.C., et al. Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research. Lancet 383 (2014), 257–266.
9. [9] Hooft, L., Bossuyt, P.M., Prospective registration of marker evaluation studies: time to act. Clin Chem 57 (2011), 1684–1686.
10. [10] Rifai, N., Altman, D.G., Bossuyt, P.M., Reporting bias in diagnostic and prognostic studies: time for action. Clin Chem 54 (2008), 1101–1103.
11. [11] Korevaar, D.A., Ochodo, E.A., Bossuyt, P.M., Hooft, L., Publication and reporting of test accuracy studies registered in ClinicalTrials.gov. Clin Chem 60 (2014), 651–659.
12. [12] Brazzelli, M., Lewis, S.C., Deeks, J.J., Sandercock, P.A., No evidence of bias in the process of publication of diagnostic accuracy studies in stroke submitted as abstracts. J Clin Epidemiol 62 (2009), 425–430.
13. [13] Wilson, C., Kerr, D., Noel-Storr, A., Quinn, T.J., Associations with publication and assessing publication bias in dementia diagnostic test accuracy studies. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 30 (2015), 1250–1256.
14. [14] Deeks, J.J., Macaskill, P., Irwig, L., The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol 58 (2005), 882–893.
15. [15] Bachmann, L.M., Puhan, M.A., ter Riet, G., Bossuyt, P.M., Sample sizes of studies on diagnostic accuracy: literature survey. BMJ 332 (2006), 1127–1129.
16. [16] Ochodo, E.A., de Haan, M.C., Reitsma, J.B., Hooft, L., Bossuyt, P.M., Leeflang, M.M., Overinterpretation and misreporting of diagnostic accuracy studies: evidence of “spin”. Radiology 267 (2013), 581–588.
17. [17] van Enst, W.A., Ochodo, E., Scholten, R.J., Hooft, L., Leeflang, M.M., Investigation of publication bias in meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy: a meta-epidemiological study. BMC Med Res Methodol, 14, 2014, 70.
18. [18] Linnet, K., Bossuyt, P.M., Moons, K.G., Reitsma, J.B., Quantifying the accuracy of a diagnostic test or marker. Clin Chem 58 (2012), 1292–1301.
19. [19] Glas, A.S., Lijmer, J.G., Prins, M.H., Bonsel, G.J., Bossuyt, P.M., The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance. J Clin Epidemiol 56 (2003), 1129–1135.
20. [20] Walter, S.D., Sinuff, T., Studies reporting ROC curves of diagnostic and prediction data can be incorporated into meta-analyses using corresponding odds ratios. J Clin Epidemiol 60 (2007), 530–534.
21. [21] Kho, M.E., Brouwers, M.C., Conference abstracts of a new oncology drug do not always lead to full publication: proceed with caution. J Clin Epidemiol 62 (2009), 752–758.
22. [22] Juzych, M.S., Shin, D.H., Coffey, J., Juzych, L., Shin, D., Whatever happened to abstracts from different sections of the association for research in vision and ophthalmology?. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 34 (1993), 1879–1882.
23. [23] Scherer, R.W., Dickersin, K., Langenberg, P., Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. A meta-analysis. JAMA 272 (1994), 158–162.
24. [24] Saldanha, I.J., Scherer, R.W., Rodriguez-Barraquer, I., Jampel, H.D., Dickersin, K., Dependability of results in conference abstracts of randomized controlled trials in ophthalmology and author financial conflicts of interest as a factor associated with full publication. Trials, 17(1), 2016, 213.
25. [25] Korevaar, D.A., Cohen, J.F., Hooft, L., Bossuyt, P.M., Literature survey of high-impact journals revealed reporting weaknesses in abstracts of diagnostic accuracy studies. J Clin Epidemiol 68 (2015), 708–715.
26. [26] Scherer, R.W., Ugarte-Gil, C., Schmucker, C., Meerpohl, J.J., Authors report lack of time as main reason for unpublished research presented at biomedical conferences: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol 68 (2015), 803–810.
27. [27] Wager, E., Williams, P., “Hardly worth the effort”? Medical journals’ policies and their editors’ and publishers’ views on trial registration and publication bias: quantitative and qualitative study. BMJ, 347, 2013, f5248.
28. [28] Lumbreras, B., Parker, L.A., Porta, M., Pollan, M., Ioannidis, J.P., Hernandez-Aguado, I., Overinterpretation of clinical applicability in molecular diagnostic research. Clin Chem 55 (2009), 786–794.
29. [29] Dickersin, K., Rennie, D., The evolution of trial registries and their use to assess the clinical trial enterprise. JAMA 307 (2012), 1861–1864.
30. [30] De Angelis, C.D., Drazen, J.M., Frizelle, F.A., Haug, C., Hoey, J., Horton, R., et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA 292 (2004), 1363–1364.
31. [31] Hooft, L., Korevaar, D.A., Molenaar, N., Bossuyt, P.M., Scholten, R.J., Endorsement of ICMJE's Clinical Trial Registration Policy: a survey among journal editors. Neth J Med 72:7 (2014), 349–355.
32. [32] Zarin, D.A., Tse, T., Ide, N.C., Trial Registration at ClinicalTrials.gov between May and October 2005. N Engl J Med 353 (2005), 2779–2787.
33. [33] Viergever, R.F., Li, K., Trends in global clinical trial registration: an analysis of numbers of registered clinical trials in different parts of the world from 2004 to 2013. BMJ Open, 5(9), 2015, e008932.
34. [34] Korevaar, D.A., Bossuyt, P.M., Hooft, L., Infrequent and incomplete registration of test accuracy studies: analysis of recent study reports. BMJ Open, 4(1), 2014, e004596.
35. [35] Altman, D.G., The time has come to register diagnostic and prognostic research. Clin Chem 60 (2014), 580–582.
36. [36] Rifai, N., Bossuyt, P.M., Ioannidis, J.P., Bray, K.R., McShane, L.M., Golub, R.M., et al. Registering diagnostic and prognostic trials of tests: is it the right thing to do?. Clin Chem 60 (2014), 1146–1152.
37. [37] Moher, D., Glasziou, P., Chalmers, I., Nasser, M., Bossuyt, P.M., Korevaar, D.A., et al. Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research: who's listening?. Lancet 387 (2016), 1573–1586.