Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative

Patrick M. Bossuyt, Johannes B. Reitsma, David E. Bruns, Constantine A. Gatsonis, Paul P. Glasziou, Les M. Irwig, Jeroen G. Lijmer, David Moher, Drummond Rennie, Henrica C. W. de Vet

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: To comprehend the results of diagnostic accuracy studies, readers must understand the design, conduct, analysis, and results of such studies. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors. Objective: To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in the study and to evaluate its generalisability. Methods: The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a 2-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing a checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy. Results: The search for published guidelines on diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. The consensus meeting shortened the list to 25 items, using evidence on bias whenever available. A prototypical flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation, the reference standard or both. Conclusions: Evaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the checklist and the flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)8-12
Number of pages5
JournalVeterinary Clinical Pathology
Volume36
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2007
Externally publishedYes

Cite this

Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., ... de Vet, H. C. W. (2007). Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative. Veterinary Clinical Pathology, 36(1), 8-12. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41
Bossuyt, Patrick M. ; Reitsma, Johannes B. ; Bruns, David E. ; Gatsonis, Constantine A. ; Glasziou, Paul P. ; Irwig, Les M. ; Lijmer, Jeroen G. ; Moher, David ; Rennie, Drummond ; de Vet, Henrica C. W. / Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy : The STARD initiative. In: Veterinary Clinical Pathology. 2007 ; Vol. 36, No. 1. pp. 8-12.
@article{1a2745672db542bcb7d43b3dfa297e3b,
title = "Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative",
abstract = "Background: To comprehend the results of diagnostic accuracy studies, readers must understand the design, conduct, analysis, and results of such studies. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors. Objective: To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in the study and to evaluate its generalisability. Methods: The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a 2-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing a checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy. Results: The search for published guidelines on diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. The consensus meeting shortened the list to 25 items, using evidence on bias whenever available. A prototypical flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation, the reference standard or both. Conclusions: Evaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the checklist and the flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.",
author = "Bossuyt, {Patrick M.} and Reitsma, {Johannes B.} and Bruns, {David E.} and Gatsonis, {Constantine A.} and Glasziou, {Paul P.} and Irwig, {Les M.} and Lijmer, {Jeroen G.} and David Moher and Drummond Rennie and {de Vet}, {Henrica C. W.}",
year = "2007",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "8--12",
journal = "Veterinary Clinical Pathology",
issn = "0275-6382",
publisher = "AMER SOC VETERINARY CLINICAL PATHOLOGY",
number = "1",

}

Bossuyt, PM, Reitsma, JB, Bruns, DE, Gatsonis, CA, Glasziou, PP, Irwig, LM, Lijmer, JG, Moher, D, Rennie, D & de Vet, HCW 2007, 'Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative' Veterinary Clinical Pathology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 8-12. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41

Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy : The STARD initiative. / Bossuyt, Patrick M.; Reitsma, Johannes B.; Bruns, David E.; Gatsonis, Constantine A.; Glasziou, Paul P.; Irwig, Les M.; Lijmer, Jeroen G.; Moher, David; Rennie, Drummond; de Vet, Henrica C. W.

In: Veterinary Clinical Pathology, Vol. 36, No. 1, 03.2007, p. 8-12.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy

T2 - The STARD initiative

AU - Bossuyt, Patrick M.

AU - Reitsma, Johannes B.

AU - Bruns, David E.

AU - Gatsonis, Constantine A.

AU - Glasziou, Paul P.

AU - Irwig, Les M.

AU - Lijmer, Jeroen G.

AU - Moher, David

AU - Rennie, Drummond

AU - de Vet, Henrica C. W.

PY - 2007/3

Y1 - 2007/3

N2 - Background: To comprehend the results of diagnostic accuracy studies, readers must understand the design, conduct, analysis, and results of such studies. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors. Objective: To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in the study and to evaluate its generalisability. Methods: The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a 2-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing a checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy. Results: The search for published guidelines on diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. The consensus meeting shortened the list to 25 items, using evidence on bias whenever available. A prototypical flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation, the reference standard or both. Conclusions: Evaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the checklist and the flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.

AB - Background: To comprehend the results of diagnostic accuracy studies, readers must understand the design, conduct, analysis, and results of such studies. That goal can be achieved only through complete transparency from authors. Objective: To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in the study and to evaluate its generalisability. Methods: The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a 2-day consensus meeting with the goal of developing a checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy. Results: The search for published guidelines on diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. The consensus meeting shortened the list to 25 items, using evidence on bias whenever available. A prototypical flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation, the reference standard or both. Conclusions: Evaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the checklist and the flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.

U2 - 10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41

DO - 10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41

M3 - Article

VL - 36

SP - 8

EP - 12

JO - Veterinary Clinical Pathology

JF - Veterinary Clinical Pathology

SN - 0275-6382

IS - 1

ER -