Cargando…

TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews

The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) provides guidance on important aspects of conducting a test accuracy systematic review. In this paper we present TOMAS-R (Template of Multiplicity and Analysis in Systematic Reviews), a structured template to use in conju...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mallett, Sue, Dinnes, Jacqueline, Takwoingi, Yemisi, de Ruffano, Lavinia Ferrante
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9494799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36131330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41512-022-00131-z
_version_ 1784793872204824576
author Mallett, Sue
Dinnes, Jacqueline
Takwoingi, Yemisi
de Ruffano, Lavinia Ferrante
author_facet Mallett, Sue
Dinnes, Jacqueline
Takwoingi, Yemisi
de Ruffano, Lavinia Ferrante
author_sort Mallett, Sue
collection PubMed
description The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) provides guidance on important aspects of conducting a test accuracy systematic review. In this paper we present TOMAS-R (Template of Multiplicity and Analysis in Systematic Reviews), a structured template to use in conjunction with current Cochrane DTA guidance, to help identify complexities in the review question and to assist planning of data extraction and analysis when clinically important variation and multiplicity is present. Examples of clinically important variation and multiplicity could include differences in participants, index tests and test methods, target conditions and reference standards used to define them, study design and methodological quality. Our TOMAS-R template goes beyond the broad topic headings in current guidance that are sources of potential variation and multiplicity, by providing prompts for common sources of heterogeneity encountered from our experience of authoring over 100 reviews. We provide examples from two reviews to assist users. The TOMAS-R template adds value by supplementing available guidance for DTA reviews by providing a tool to facilitate discussions between methodologists, clinicians, statisticians and patient/public team members to identify the full breadth of review question complexities early in the process. The use of a structured set of prompting questions at the important stage of writing the protocol ensures clinical relevance as a main focus of the review, while allowing identification of key clinical components for data extraction and later analysis thereby facilitating a more efficient review process. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41512-022-00131-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9494799
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94947992022-09-23 TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews Mallett, Sue Dinnes, Jacqueline Takwoingi, Yemisi de Ruffano, Lavinia Ferrante Diagn Progn Res Methodology The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) provides guidance on important aspects of conducting a test accuracy systematic review. In this paper we present TOMAS-R (Template of Multiplicity and Analysis in Systematic Reviews), a structured template to use in conjunction with current Cochrane DTA guidance, to help identify complexities in the review question and to assist planning of data extraction and analysis when clinically important variation and multiplicity is present. Examples of clinically important variation and multiplicity could include differences in participants, index tests and test methods, target conditions and reference standards used to define them, study design and methodological quality. Our TOMAS-R template goes beyond the broad topic headings in current guidance that are sources of potential variation and multiplicity, by providing prompts for common sources of heterogeneity encountered from our experience of authoring over 100 reviews. We provide examples from two reviews to assist users. The TOMAS-R template adds value by supplementing available guidance for DTA reviews by providing a tool to facilitate discussions between methodologists, clinicians, statisticians and patient/public team members to identify the full breadth of review question complexities early in the process. The use of a structured set of prompting questions at the important stage of writing the protocol ensures clinical relevance as a main focus of the review, while allowing identification of key clinical components for data extraction and later analysis thereby facilitating a more efficient review process. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41512-022-00131-z. BioMed Central 2022-09-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9494799/ /pubmed/36131330 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41512-022-00131-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Methodology
Mallett, Sue
Dinnes, Jacqueline
Takwoingi, Yemisi
de Ruffano, Lavinia Ferrante
TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
title TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
title_full TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
title_fullStr TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
title_full_unstemmed TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
title_short TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
title_sort tomas-r: a template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9494799/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36131330
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41512-022-00131-z
work_keys_str_mv AT mallettsue tomasratemplatetoidentifyandplananalysisforclinicallyimportantvariationandmultiplicityindiagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews
AT dinnesjacqueline tomasratemplatetoidentifyandplananalysisforclinicallyimportantvariationandmultiplicityindiagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews
AT takwoingiyemisi tomasratemplatetoidentifyandplananalysisforclinicallyimportantvariationandmultiplicityindiagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews
AT deruffanolaviniaferrante tomasratemplatetoidentifyandplananalysisforclinicallyimportantvariationandmultiplicityindiagnostictestaccuracysystematicreviews