Devillé Walter L, Buntinx Frank, Bouter Lex M, Montori Victor M, de Vet Henrica C W, van der Windt Danielle A W M, Bezemer P Dick
Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine (EMGO Institute), VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002 Jul 3;2:9. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-2-9.
Although guidelines for critical appraisal of diagnostic research and meta-analyses have already been published, these may be difficult to understand for clinical researchers or do not provide enough detailed information.
Development of guidelines based on a systematic review of the evidence in reports of systematic searches of the literature for diagnostic research, of methodological criteria to evaluate diagnostic research, of methods for statistical pooling of data on diagnostic accuracy, and of methods for exploring heterogeneity.
Guidelines for conducting diagnostic systematic reviews are presented in a stepwise fashion and are followed by comments providing further information. Examples are given using the results of two systematic reviews on the accuracy of the urine dipstick in the diagnosis of urinary tract infections, and on the accuracy of the straight-leg-raising test in the diagnosis of intervertebral disc hernia.
尽管关于诊断性研究和荟萃分析的批判性评价指南已经发布,但临床研究人员可能难以理解这些指南,或者这些指南没有提供足够详细的信息。
基于对以下内容的文献系统检索证据进行系统评价来制定指南,这些内容包括诊断性研究、评估诊断性研究的方法学标准、诊断准确性数据的统计合并方法以及探索异质性的方法。
以逐步方式呈现了进行诊断性系统评价的指南,并随后给出了提供进一步信息的注释。使用两项关于尿试纸条诊断尿路感染准确性和直腿抬高试验诊断椎间盘疝准确性的系统评价结果给出了示例。