Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative
Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative
复制标题
DOI：
10.1373/49.1.1
复制
发表时间：
2003-01-01
影响因子：
9.3
通讯作者：
de Vet, HCW
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bossuyt, PM;Reitsma, JB;de Vet, HCW
背景：为了理解诊断准确性研究的结果，读者必须了解此类研究的设计、实施、分析和结果。只有作者完全透明，这一目标才能实现。
目的：提高诊断准确性研究报告的准确性和完整性，使读者能够评估研究中的偏倚可能性并评价其普遍性。
方法：诊断准确性报告标准（STARD）指导委员会检索文献，以确定关于诊断研究的恰当实施和报告的出版物，并将潜在条目提取到一个详细的列表中。研究人员、编辑以及专业组织的成员在为期两天的共识会议期间对该列表进行了简化，目的是为诊断准确性研究制定一份清单和一个通用流程图。
结果：对已发表的诊断研究指南的检索产生了33份先前发表的清单，我们从其中提取了一份包含75个潜在条目的列表。共识会议利用现有的偏倚证据将该列表缩短至25个条目。一个原型流程图提供了有关患者招募方法、检测执行顺序以及接受被评估检测的患者数量、参考标准或两者的信息。
结论：对研究的评价取决于完整和准确的报告。如果医学期刊采用该清单和流程图，诊断准确性研究报告的质量应该会提高，这对临床医生、研究人员、审稿人、期刊和公众都有利。
Background: To comprehend the results of diagnostic accuracy studies, readers must understand the design, conduct, analysis, and results of such studies. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors.Objective: To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in the study and to evaluate its generalisability.Methods: The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a two-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing a checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy.Results: The search for published guidelines on diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. The consensus meeting shortened the list to 25 items, using evidence on bias whenever available. A prototypical flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation, the reference standard or both.Conclusions: Evaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the checklist and the flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.