首页> 外文OA文献 >Diagnostic accuracy research in glaucoma is still incompletely reported: An application of Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015
【2h】

Diagnostic accuracy research in glaucoma is still incompletely reported: An application of Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015

机译:青光眼的诊断准确性研究仍未完全报道:2015年诊断准确性研究报告标准(STARD)的应用

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Research has shown a modest adherence of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies in glaucoma to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD). We have applied the updated 30-item STARD 2015 checklist to a set of studies included in a Cochrane DTA systematic review of imaging tools for diagnosing manifest glaucoma. Three pairs of reviewers, including one senior reviewer who assessed all studies, independently checked the adherence of each study to STARD 2015. Adherence was analyzed on an individual-item basis. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of publication year and impact factor on adherence. We included 106 DTA studies, published between 2003-2014 in journals with a median impact factor of 2.6. Overall adherence was 54.1% for 3,286 individual rating across 31 items, with a mean of 16.8 (SD: 3.1; range 8-23) items per study. Large variability in adherence to reporting standards was detected across individual STARD 2015 items, ranging from 0 to 100%. Nine items (1: identification as diagnostic accuracy study in title/abstract; 6: eligibility criteria; 10: index test (a) and reference standard (b) definition; 12: cut-off definitions for index test (a) and reference standard (b); 14: estimation of diagnostic accuracy measures; 21a: severity spectrum of diseased; 23: cross-tabulation of the index and reference standard results) were adequately reported in more than 90% of the studies. Conversely, 10 items (3: scientific and clinical background of the index test; 11: rationale for the reference standard; 13b: blinding of index test results; 17: analyses of variability; 18; sample size calculation; 19: study flow diagram; 20: baseline characteristics of participants; 28: registration number and registry; 29: availability of study protocol; 30: sources of funding) were adequately reported in less than 30% of the studies. Only four items showed a statistically significant improvement over time: missing data (16), baseline characteristics of participants (20), estimates of diagnostic accuracy (24) and sources of funding (30). Adherence to STARD 2015 among DTA studies in glaucoma research is incomplete, and only modestly increasing over time
机译:研究表明,青光眼中诊断测试准确性(DTA)研究适度遵守了诊断准确性研究报告标准(STARD)。我们将更新的30件STARD 2015清单应用于Cochrane DTA影像学工具诊断系统性青光眼的系统评价中的一组研究。三对审稿人,包括一名评估所有研究的资深审稿人,独立检查了每项研究对STARD 2015的依从性。对依从性进行了逐项分析。使用Logistic回归评估出版年份和影响因子对依从性的影响。我们纳入了106篇DTA研究,这些研究在2003年至2014年之间发表在期刊中,影响因子的中位数为2.6。在31个项目中,对3,286个个人评分的总体依从性为54.1%,平均每个研究为16.8(标准差:3.1;范围8-23)。在各个STARD 2015项目中检测到遵守报告标准的差异很大,范围从0%到100%。九项(1:在标题/摘要中鉴定为诊断准确性研究; 6:资格标准; 10:指标测试(a)和参考标准(b)定义; 12:指标测试的临界值定义(a)和参考标准(b); 14:诊断准确性措施的估计; 21a:患病的严重程度谱图; 23:指数和参考标准结果的交叉表)在超过90%的研究中得到了充分报道。相反,有10个项目(3:指标测试的科学和临床背景; 11:参考标准的依据; 13b:指标测试结果的盲目性; 17:变异性分析; 18;样本量计算; 19:研究流程图; 19: 20:参与者的基线特征; 28:注册号和注册表; 29:研究方案的可用性; 30:资金来源)在不到30%的研究中得到了充分报道。随时间变化,只有四个项目显示出统计学上的显着改善:缺失数据(16),参与者的基线特征(20),诊断准确性评估(24)和资金来源(30)。青光眼研究中DTA研究中对STARD 2015的依从性尚不完全,并且随着时间的推移仅适度增加

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号