Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration
52
Zitationen
11
Autoren
2022
Jahr
Abstract
Diagnostic accuracy studies are, like other clinical studies, at risk of bias due to shortcomings in design and conduct, and the results of a diagnostic accuracy study may not apply to other patient groups and settings. Readers of study reports need to be informed about study design and conduct, in sufficient detail to judge the trustworthiness and applicability of the study findings. The STARD statement (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) was developed to improve the completeness and transparency of reports of diagnostic accuracy studies. STARD contains a list of essential items that can be used as a checklist, by authors, reviewers and other readers, to ensure that a report of a diagnostic accuracy study contains the necessary information. STARD was recently updated. All updated STARD materials, including the checklist, are available at http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard. Here, we present the STARD 2015 explanation and elaboration document. Through commented examples of appropriate reporting, we clarify the rationale for each of the 30 items on the STARD 2015 checklist, and describe what is expected from authors in developing sufficiently informative study reports. Present article is Russian-language translation of the original manuscript edited by Doctor of Medicine R.T. Saygitov. Present translation was first published in Digital Diagnostics. doi: 10.17816/DD71031. It is published with minor changes related to the literary editing of the translation itself.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 84.856 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 82.787 Zit.
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
1977 · 76.851 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 62.738 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 61.458 Zit.
Autoren
Institutionen
- University of Amsterdam(NL)
- Université Paris Cité(FR)
- Délégation Paris 5(FR)
- Descartes (Belgium)(BE)
- University of Oxford(GB)
- University of Virginia(US)
- John Brown University(US)
- Utrecht University(NL)
- University of Sydney(AU)
- Hadassah Medical Center(IL)
- Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc(NL)
- University Medical Center(US)
- University Hospital and Clinics(US)