OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies has improved since the publication of the Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy studies (STARD statement). METHODS: The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in 12 medical journals in 2000 (pre-STARD) and 2004 (post-STARD) was evaluated by two reviewers independently. For each article, the number of reported STARD items was counted (range 0 to 25). Differences in completeness of reporting between articles published in 2000 and 2004 were analyzed, using multilevel analyses. RESULTS: We included 124 articles published in 2000 and 141 articles published in 2004. Mean number of reported STARD items was 11.9 (range 3.5 to 19.5) in 2000 and 13.6 (range 4.0 to 21.0) in 2004, an increase of 1.81 items (95% CI: 0.61 to 3.01). Articles published in 2004 reported the following significantly more often: methods for calculating test reproducibility of the index test (16% vs 35%); distribution of the severity of disease and other diagnoses (23% vs 53%); estimates of variability of diagnostic accuracy between subgroups (39% vs 60%); and a flow diagram (2% vs 12%). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies has improved slightly over time, without a more pronounced effect in journals that adopted the STARD statement. As there is still room for improvement, editors should mention the use of the STARD statement as a requirement in their guidelines for authors, and instruct reviewers to check the STARD items. Authors should include a flow diagram in their manuscript.

The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved / Smidt, N; Rutjes, A; van der Windt, Da; Ostelo, Rw; Bossuyt, Pm; Reitsma, Jb; Bouter LM, ; de Vet, Hc. - In: NEUROLOGY. - ISSN 0028-3878. - 67:5(2006), pp. 792-797. [10.1212/01.wnl.0000238386.41398.30]

The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved

Rutjes A;
2006

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies has improved since the publication of the Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy studies (STARD statement). METHODS: The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in 12 medical journals in 2000 (pre-STARD) and 2004 (post-STARD) was evaluated by two reviewers independently. For each article, the number of reported STARD items was counted (range 0 to 25). Differences in completeness of reporting between articles published in 2000 and 2004 were analyzed, using multilevel analyses. RESULTS: We included 124 articles published in 2000 and 141 articles published in 2004. Mean number of reported STARD items was 11.9 (range 3.5 to 19.5) in 2000 and 13.6 (range 4.0 to 21.0) in 2004, an increase of 1.81 items (95% CI: 0.61 to 3.01). Articles published in 2004 reported the following significantly more often: methods for calculating test reproducibility of the index test (16% vs 35%); distribution of the severity of disease and other diagnoses (23% vs 53%); estimates of variability of diagnostic accuracy between subgroups (39% vs 60%); and a flow diagram (2% vs 12%). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies has improved slightly over time, without a more pronounced effect in journals that adopted the STARD statement. As there is still room for improvement, editors should mention the use of the STARD statement as a requirement in their guidelines for authors, and instruct reviewers to check the STARD items. Authors should include a flow diagram in their manuscript.
2006
67
5
792
797
The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved / Smidt, N; Rutjes, A; van der Windt, Da; Ostelo, Rw; Bossuyt, Pm; Reitsma, Jb; Bouter LM, ; de Vet, Hc. - In: NEUROLOGY. - ISSN 0028-3878. - 67:5(2006), pp. 792-797. [10.1212/01.wnl.0000238386.41398.30]
Smidt, N; Rutjes, A; van der Windt, Da; Ostelo, Rw; Bossuyt, Pm; Reitsma, Jb; Bouter LM, ; de Vet, Hc
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2006_Smidt_Rutjes_Neurology_2006.pdf

Accesso riservato

Descrizione: Author's pesonal copy
Tipologia: Versione pubblicata dall'editore
Dimensione 1.19 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.19 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1286678
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 71
  • Scopus 214
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 191
social impact