3 research outputs found
Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement.
This is the final version of the article. Available from American Medical Association via the DOI in this record.Importance: Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy synthesize data from primary diagnostic studies that have evaluated the accuracy of 1 or more index tests against a reference standard, provide estimates of test performance, allow comparisons of the accuracy of different tests, and facilitate the identification of sources of variability in test accuracy. Objective: To develop the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagnostic test accuracy guideline as a stand-alone extension of the PRISMA statement. Modifications to the PRISMA statement reflect the specific requirements for reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies and the abstracts for these reviews. Design: Established standards from the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network were followed for the development of the guideline. The original PRISMA statement was used as a framework on which to modify and add items. A group of 24 multidisciplinary experts used a systematic review of articles on existing reporting guidelines and methods, a 3-round Delphi process, a consensus meeting, pilot testing, and iterative refinement to develop the PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy guideline. The final version of the PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy guideline checklist was approved by the group. Findings: The systematic review (produced 64 items) and the Delphi process (provided feedback on 7 proposed items; 1 item was later split into 2 items) identified 71 potentially relevant items for consideration. The Delphi process reduced these to 60 items that were discussed at the consensus meeting. Following the meeting, pilot testing and iterative feedback were used to generate the 27-item PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy checklist. To reflect specific or optimal contemporary systematic review methods for diagnostic test accuracy, 8 of the 27 original PRISMA items were left unchanged, 17 were modified, 2 were added, and 2 were omitted. Conclusions and Relevance: The 27-item PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy checklist provides specific guidance for reporting of systematic reviews. The PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy guideline can facilitate the transparent reporting of reviews, and may assist in the evaluation of validity and applicability, enhance replicability of reviews, and make the results from systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies more useful.The research was supported by grant 375751 from the Canadian Institute for Health Research; funding from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; funding from the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Group; funding from the University of Ottawa Department of Radiology Research Stipend Program; and funding from the National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula
Diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert MTB/RIF assay for tuberculous pericarditis: A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis
Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement
Importance: Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy synthesize data from
primary diagnostic studies that have evaluated the accuracy of 1 or more index
tests against a reference standard, provide estimates of test performance, allow
comparisons of the accuracy of different tests, and facilitate the identification
of sources of variability in test accuracy.
Objective: To develop the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and
Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) diagnostic test accuracy guideline as a stand-alone
extension of the PRISMA statement. Modifications to the PRISMA statement reflect
the specific requirements for reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
of diagnostic test accuracy studies and the abstracts for these reviews.
Design: Established standards from the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of
Health Research (EQUATOR) Network were followed for the development of the
guideline. The original PRISMA statement was used as a framework on which to
modify and add items. A group of 24 multidisciplinary experts used a systematic
review of articles on existing reporting guidelines and methods, a 3-round Delphi
process, a consensus meeting, pilot testing, and iterative refinement to develop
the PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy guideline. The final version of the PRISMA
diagnostic test accuracy guideline checklist was approved by the group.
Findings: The systematic review (produced 64 items) and the Delphi process
(provided feedback on 7 proposed items; 1 item was later split into 2 items)
identified 71 potentially relevant items for consideration. The Delphi process
reduced these to 60 items that were discussed at the consensus meeting. Following
the meeting, pilot testing and iterative feedback were used to generate the
27-item PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy checklist. To reflect specific or optimal
contemporary systematic review methods for diagnostic test accuracy, 8 of the 27
original PRISMA items were left unchanged, 17 were modified, 2 were added, and 2
were omitted.
Conclusions and Relevance: The 27-item PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy checklist
provides specific guidance for reporting of systematic reviews. The PRISMA
diagnostic test accuracy guideline can facilitate the transparent reporting of
reviews, and may assist in the evaluation of validity and applicability, enhance
replicability of reviews, and make the results from systematic reviews of
diagnostic test accuracy studies more useful