Abstract
BackgroundThis 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).MethodsStudy 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®, Ovid MEDLINE® 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.ResultsThe 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).ConclusionItems 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.
Highlights
Item 4 requires framing the role of the index test in the existing clinical pathway; understanding the clinical role of a test is essential to generalizability of findings
We performed a systematic review of existing guidance on reporting of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic reviews in order to compile a list of potential items that might be included in a reporting guideline for such reviews, the PRISMA extension for DTA (PRISMA-DTA)
The identified items along with citations for the sources from which they were taken are presented in Table 1; shaded items on the table indicate items specific to diagnostic accuracy systematic reviews, while unshaded items represent more general guidance for systematic reviews
Summary
Item 4 requires framing the role of the index test in the existing clinical pathway; understanding the clinical role of a test is essential to generalizability of findings. 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). In their 2015 report titled “Improving Diagnosis in Healthcare”, the National Academy of Medicine identified a better understanding of the performance of diagnostic tests as an imminent priority for patient safety [1]. Existing guidance for reporting of DTA systematic reviews is limited to nonsystematic “expert opinion” [2, 15, 16], guidance on specific methodologic items [6, 17], or work that is not yet complete [18]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
