Recommendations for reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy: a systematic review

被引:112
|
作者
McGrath, Trevor A. [1 ]
Alabousi, Mostafa [2 ]
Skidmore, Becky [3 ]
Korevaar, Daniel A. [4 ]
Bossuyt, Patrick M. M. [4 ]
Moher, David [5 ]
Thombs, Brett [6 ,7 ]
McInnes, Matthew D. F. [8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ottawa, Fac Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[2] McMaster Univ, Dept Radiol, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[3] Ottawa Hosp, Res Inst, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[4] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol Biostat & Bioinformat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[5] Ottawa Hosp, Res Inst, Clin Epidemiol Program, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[6] McGill Univ, Jewish Gen Hosp, Lady Davis Inst, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[7] McGill Univ, Dept Psychiat, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[8] Univ Ottawa, Ottawa Hosp, Clin Epidemiol Program, Dept Radiol,Res Inst, Room c159,Civ Campus,1053 Carling Ave, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4E9, Canada
关键词
HEALTH-CARE; MULTIPLE; QUALITY; WASTE; TOOL;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-017-0590-8
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: This study is to perform a systematic review of existing guidance on quality of reporting and methodology for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) in order to compile a list of potential items that might be included in a reporting guideline for such reviews: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA). Methods: Study protocol published on EQUATOR website. Articles in full text or abstract form that reported on any aspect of reporting systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy were eligible for inclusion. We used the Ovid platform to search Ovid MEDLINE (R), Ovid MEDLINE (R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Embase Classic+Embase through May 5, 2016. The Cochrane Methodology Register in the Cochrane Library (Wiley version) was also searched. Title and abstract screening followed by full-text screening of all search results was performed independently by two investigators. Guideline organization websites, published guidance statements, and the Cochrane Handbook for Diagnostic Test Accuracy were also searched. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) were assessed independently by two investigators for relevant items. Results: The literature searched yielded 6967 results; 386 were included after title and abstract screening and 203 after full-text screening. After reviewing the existing literature and guidance documents, a preliminary list of 64 items was compiled into the following categories: title (three items); introduction (two items); methods (35 items); results (13 items); discussion (nine items), and disclosure (two items). Conclusion: Items on the methods and reporting of DTA systematic reviews in the present systematic review will provide a basis for generating a PRISMA extension for DTA systematic reviews.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Optimizing the reporting and conduct of systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses
    Boyadzhieva, Zhivana
    Nielsen, Sabrina Mai
    Buttgereit, Frank
    Christensen, Robin
    Palmowski, Andriko
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR RHEUMATOLOGIE, 2023, 82 (02): : 175 - 176
  • [42] Quality and Reporting Completeness of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Dermatology
    Smires, Sophia
    Afach, Sivem
    Mazaud, Canelle
    Phan, Celine
    Doval, Ignacio Garcia
    Boyle, Robert
    Dellavalle, Robert
    Williams, Hywel C.
    Grindlay, Douglas
    Sbidian, Emilie
    Le Cleach, Laurence
    JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY, 2021, 141 (01) : 64 - 71
  • [43] Systematic review and meta-analyses on the diagnostic accuracy of the phototest for dementia screening
    Carnero-Pardo, C.
    Espejo Martinez, B.
    Montoro-Rios, M. T.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2009, 16 : 344 - 344
  • [44] Reporting quality of systematic reviews with network meta-analyses in Endodontics
    Venkateshbabu Nagendrababu
    Srinivasan Narasimhan
    Clovis M. Faggion
    Lalli Dharmarajan
    Pullikotil Shaju Jacob
    Vellore Kannan Gopinath
    Paul M. H. Dummer
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2023, 27 : 3437 - 3445
  • [45] Recommendations to Improve Quality of Probiotic Systematic Reviews With Meta-Analyses
    McFarland, Lynne V.
    Hecht, Gail
    Sanders, Mary E.
    Goff, Debra A.
    Goldstein, Ellie J. C.
    Hill, Colin
    Johnson, Stuart
    Kashi, Maryam R.
    Kullar, Ravina
    Marco, Maria L.
    Merenstein, Daniel J.
    Millette, Mathieu
    Preidis, Geoffrey A.
    Quigley, Eamonn M. M.
    Reid, Gregor
    Salminen, Seppo
    Sniffen, Jason C.
    Sokol, Harry
    Szajewska, Hania
    Tancredi, Daniel J.
    Woolard, Kristin
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2023, 6 (12) : E2346872
  • [46] Quality of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of resveratrol: A methodological systematic review
    Lu, Cuncun
    Ke, Lixin
    Zhang, Qiang
    Deng, Xiuxiu
    Shang, Wenru
    Zhao, Xiaoxiao
    Li, Yuanyuan
    Xie, Yanming
    Wang, Zhifei
    PHYTOTHERAPY RESEARCH, 2024, 38 (01) : 11 - 21
  • [47] Challenges in the peer review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Vintzileos, Anthony M.
    Carvajal, Jonathan
    Islam, Shahidul
    JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2013, 26 (08): : 768 - 771
  • [48] Expert reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Macbeth, F
    Overgaard, J
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2002, 64 (03) : 233 - 234
  • [49] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic studies: a practical guideline
    Ramin Sadeghi
    Giorgio Treglia
    Clinical and Translational Imaging, 2017, 5 : 83 - 87
  • [50] Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic studies: a practical guideline
    Sadeghi, Ramin
    Treglia, Giorgio
    CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL IMAGING, 2017, 5 (02) : 83 - 87