Cargando…
Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation
BACKGROUND: Assessment of diagnostic tests, broadly defined as any element that aids in the collection of additional information for further clarification of a patient’s health status, has increasingly become a critical issue in health policy and decision-making. Diagnostic evidence, including the a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6460809/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31093577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41512-019-0052-y |
_version_ | 1783410387017793536 |
---|---|
author | Arevalo-Rodriguez, Ingrid Tricco, Andrea C. Steingart, Karen R. Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara Kaunelis, David Alonso-Coello, Pablo Baxter, Susan Bossuyt, Patrick M. Zamora, Javier |
author_facet | Arevalo-Rodriguez, Ingrid Tricco, Andrea C. Steingart, Karen R. Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara Kaunelis, David Alonso-Coello, Pablo Baxter, Susan Bossuyt, Patrick M. Zamora, Javier |
author_sort | Arevalo-Rodriguez, Ingrid |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Assessment of diagnostic tests, broadly defined as any element that aids in the collection of additional information for further clarification of a patient’s health status, has increasingly become a critical issue in health policy and decision-making. Diagnostic evidence, including the accuracy of a medical test for a target condition, is commonly appraised using standard systematic review methodology. Owing to the considerable time and resources required to conduct these, rapid reviews have emerged as a pragmatic alternative by tailoring methods according to the decision maker’s circumstances. However, it is not known if streamlining methodological aspects has an impact on the validity of evidence synthesis. Furthermore, due to the particular nature and complexity of the appraisal of diagnostic accuracy, there is need for detailed guidance on how to conduct rapid reviews of diagnostic tests. In this study, we aim to identify the methods currently used by rapid review developers to synthesize evidence on diagnostic test accuracy, as well as to analyze potential shortcomings and challenges related to these methods. METHODS: We will carry out a two-fold approach: (1) an international survey of professionals working in organizations that develop rapid reviews of diagnostic tests, in terms of the methods and resources used by these agencies when conducting rapid reviews, and (2) semi-structured interviews with senior-level individuals to further explore and validate the findings from the survey and to identify challenges in conducting rapid reviews. We will use STATA 15.0 for quantitative analyses and framework analysis for qualitative analyses. We will ensure protection of data during all stages. DISCUSSION: The main result of this research will be a map of methods and resources currently used for conducting rapid reviews of diagnostic test accuracy, as well as methodological shortcomings and potential solutions in diagnostic knowledge synthesis that require further research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6460809 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64608092019-05-15 Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation Arevalo-Rodriguez, Ingrid Tricco, Andrea C. Steingart, Karen R. Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara Kaunelis, David Alonso-Coello, Pablo Baxter, Susan Bossuyt, Patrick M. Zamora, Javier Diagn Progn Res Protocol BACKGROUND: Assessment of diagnostic tests, broadly defined as any element that aids in the collection of additional information for further clarification of a patient’s health status, has increasingly become a critical issue in health policy and decision-making. Diagnostic evidence, including the accuracy of a medical test for a target condition, is commonly appraised using standard systematic review methodology. Owing to the considerable time and resources required to conduct these, rapid reviews have emerged as a pragmatic alternative by tailoring methods according to the decision maker’s circumstances. However, it is not known if streamlining methodological aspects has an impact on the validity of evidence synthesis. Furthermore, due to the particular nature and complexity of the appraisal of diagnostic accuracy, there is need for detailed guidance on how to conduct rapid reviews of diagnostic tests. In this study, we aim to identify the methods currently used by rapid review developers to synthesize evidence on diagnostic test accuracy, as well as to analyze potential shortcomings and challenges related to these methods. METHODS: We will carry out a two-fold approach: (1) an international survey of professionals working in organizations that develop rapid reviews of diagnostic tests, in terms of the methods and resources used by these agencies when conducting rapid reviews, and (2) semi-structured interviews with senior-level individuals to further explore and validate the findings from the survey and to identify challenges in conducting rapid reviews. We will use STATA 15.0 for quantitative analyses and framework analysis for qualitative analyses. We will ensure protection of data during all stages. DISCUSSION: The main result of this research will be a map of methods and resources currently used for conducting rapid reviews of diagnostic test accuracy, as well as methodological shortcomings and potential solutions in diagnostic knowledge synthesis that require further research. BioMed Central 2019-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6460809/ /pubmed/31093577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41512-019-0052-y Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Protocol Arevalo-Rodriguez, Ingrid Tricco, Andrea C. Steingart, Karen R. Nussbaumer-Streit, Barbara Kaunelis, David Alonso-Coello, Pablo Baxter, Susan Bossuyt, Patrick M. Zamora, Javier Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation |
title | Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation |
title_full | Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation |
title_fullStr | Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation |
title_full_unstemmed | Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation |
title_short | Challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation |
title_sort | challenges of rapid reviews for diagnostic test accuracy questions: a protocol for an international survey and expert consultation |
topic | Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6460809/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31093577 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41512-019-0052-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT arevalorodriguezingrid challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT triccoandreac challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT steingartkarenr challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT nussbaumerstreitbarbara challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT kaunelisdavid challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT alonsocoellopablo challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT baxtersusan challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT bossuytpatrickm challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation AT zamorajavier challengesofrapidreviewsfordiagnostictestaccuracyquestionsaprotocolforaninternationalsurveyandexpertconsultation |