Cargando…

Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015

BACKGROUND: Poor reporting quality in diagnostic accuracy studies hampers an adequate judgment of the validity of the study. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement was published to improve the reporting quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. This study aimed to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jang, Mi-Ae, Kim, Bohyun, Lee, You Kyoung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6933069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31858765
http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2020.40.3.245
_version_ 1783483139217162240
author Jang, Mi-Ae
Kim, Bohyun
Lee, You Kyoung
author_facet Jang, Mi-Ae
Kim, Bohyun
Lee, You Kyoung
author_sort Jang, Mi-Ae
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Poor reporting quality in diagnostic accuracy studies hampers an adequate judgment of the validity of the study. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement was published to improve the reporting quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. This study aimed to evaluate the adherence of diagnostic accuracy studies published in Annals of Laboratory Medicine (ALM) to STARD 2015 and to identify directions for improvement in the reporting quality of these studies. METHODS: Two independent authors assessed articles published in ALM between 2012–2018 for compliance with 30 STARD 2015 checklist items to identify all eligible diagnostic accuracy studies published during this period. We included 66 diagnostic accuracy studies. A total of the fulfilled STARD items were calculated, and adherence was analyzed on an individual-item basis. RESULTS: The overall mean±SD number of STARD items reported for the included studies was 11.2±2.7. Only five (7.6%) studies adhered to more than 50% of the 30 items. No study satisfied more than 80% of the items. Large variability in adherence to reporting standards was detected across items, ranging from 0% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to STARD 2015 is suboptimal among diagnostic accuracy studies published in ALM. Our study emphasizes the necessity of adherence to STARD to improve the reporting quality of future diagnostic accuracy studies to be published in ALM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6933069
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69330692020-05-01 Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015 Jang, Mi-Ae Kim, Bohyun Lee, You Kyoung Ann Lab Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Poor reporting quality in diagnostic accuracy studies hampers an adequate judgment of the validity of the study. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement was published to improve the reporting quality of diagnostic accuracy studies. This study aimed to evaluate the adherence of diagnostic accuracy studies published in Annals of Laboratory Medicine (ALM) to STARD 2015 and to identify directions for improvement in the reporting quality of these studies. METHODS: Two independent authors assessed articles published in ALM between 2012–2018 for compliance with 30 STARD 2015 checklist items to identify all eligible diagnostic accuracy studies published during this period. We included 66 diagnostic accuracy studies. A total of the fulfilled STARD items were calculated, and adherence was analyzed on an individual-item basis. RESULTS: The overall mean±SD number of STARD items reported for the included studies was 11.2±2.7. Only five (7.6%) studies adhered to more than 50% of the 30 items. No study satisfied more than 80% of the items. Large variability in adherence to reporting standards was detected across items, ranging from 0% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to STARD 2015 is suboptimal among diagnostic accuracy studies published in ALM. Our study emphasizes the necessity of adherence to STARD to improve the reporting quality of future diagnostic accuracy studies to be published in ALM. The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 2020-05 2019-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6933069/ /pubmed/31858765 http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2020.40.3.245 Text en © The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Jang, Mi-Ae
Kim, Bohyun
Lee, You Kyoung
Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015
title Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015
title_full Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015
title_fullStr Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015
title_full_unstemmed Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015
title_short Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Laboratory Medicine: Adherence to Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015
title_sort reporting quality of diagnostic accuracy studies in laboratory medicine: adherence to standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies (stard) 2015
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6933069/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31858765
http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2020.40.3.245
work_keys_str_mv AT jangmiae reportingqualityofdiagnosticaccuracystudiesinlaboratorymedicineadherencetostandardsforreportingofdiagnosticaccuracystudiesstard2015
AT kimbohyun reportingqualityofdiagnosticaccuracystudiesinlaboratorymedicineadherencetostandardsforreportingofdiagnosticaccuracystudiesstard2015
AT leeyoukyoung reportingqualityofdiagnosticaccuracystudiesinlaboratorymedicineadherencetostandardsforreportingofdiagnosticaccuracystudiesstard2015