Cargando…
STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma
AIM: To investigate the reproducibility of the updated Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (STARD 2015) in a set of 106 studies included in a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic review of imaging tests for diagnosing manifest glaucoma. METHODS: One senior r...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5638332/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29023557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186209 |
_version_ | 1783270726623559680 |
---|---|
author | Virgili, Gianni Michelessi, Manuele Miele, Alba Oddone, Francesco Crescioli, Giada Fameli, Valeria Lucenteforte, Ersilia |
author_facet | Virgili, Gianni Michelessi, Manuele Miele, Alba Oddone, Francesco Crescioli, Giada Fameli, Valeria Lucenteforte, Ersilia |
author_sort | Virgili, Gianni |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: To investigate the reproducibility of the updated Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (STARD 2015) in a set of 106 studies included in a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic review of imaging tests for diagnosing manifest glaucoma. METHODS: One senior rater with DTA methodological and clinical expertise used STARD 2015 on all studies, and each of three raters with different training profiles assessed about a third of the studies. RESULTS: Raw agreement was very good or almost perfect between the senior rater and an ophthalmology resident with DTA methods training, acceptable with a clinical rater with little DTA methods training, and only moderate with a pharmacology researcher with general, but not DTA, systematic review training and no clinical expertise. The relationship between adherence with STARD 2015 and methodological quality with QUADAS 2 was only partial and difficult to investigate, suggesting that raters used substantial context knowledge in risk of bias assessment. CONCLUSIONS: STARD 2015 proved to be reproducible in this specific research field, provided that both clinical and DTA methodological expertise are achieved through training of its users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5638332 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56383322017-10-20 STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma Virgili, Gianni Michelessi, Manuele Miele, Alba Oddone, Francesco Crescioli, Giada Fameli, Valeria Lucenteforte, Ersilia PLoS One Research Article AIM: To investigate the reproducibility of the updated Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool (STARD 2015) in a set of 106 studies included in a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic review of imaging tests for diagnosing manifest glaucoma. METHODS: One senior rater with DTA methodological and clinical expertise used STARD 2015 on all studies, and each of three raters with different training profiles assessed about a third of the studies. RESULTS: Raw agreement was very good or almost perfect between the senior rater and an ophthalmology resident with DTA methods training, acceptable with a clinical rater with little DTA methods training, and only moderate with a pharmacology researcher with general, but not DTA, systematic review training and no clinical expertise. The relationship between adherence with STARD 2015 and methodological quality with QUADAS 2 was only partial and difficult to investigate, suggesting that raters used substantial context knowledge in risk of bias assessment. CONCLUSIONS: STARD 2015 proved to be reproducible in this specific research field, provided that both clinical and DTA methodological expertise are achieved through training of its users. Public Library of Science 2017-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5638332/ /pubmed/29023557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186209 Text en © 2017 Virgili et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Virgili, Gianni Michelessi, Manuele Miele, Alba Oddone, Francesco Crescioli, Giada Fameli, Valeria Lucenteforte, Ersilia STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma |
title | STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma |
title_full | STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma |
title_fullStr | STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma |
title_full_unstemmed | STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma |
title_short | STARD 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma |
title_sort | stard 2015 was reproducible in a large set of studies on glaucoma |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5638332/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29023557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186209 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT virgiligianni stard2015wasreproducibleinalargesetofstudiesonglaucoma AT michelessimanuele stard2015wasreproducibleinalargesetofstudiesonglaucoma AT mielealba stard2015wasreproducibleinalargesetofstudiesonglaucoma AT oddonefrancesco stard2015wasreproducibleinalargesetofstudiesonglaucoma AT crescioligiada stard2015wasreproducibleinalargesetofstudiesonglaucoma AT famelivaleria stard2015wasreproducibleinalargesetofstudiesonglaucoma AT lucenteforteersilia stard2015wasreproducibleinalargesetofstudiesonglaucoma |