文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

诊断测试准确性研究的系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA-DTA 声明。

Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

JAMA. 2018 Jan 23;319(4):388-396. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19163.


DOI:10.1001/jama.2017.19163
PMID:29362800
Abstract

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.

摘要

重要性:系统评价诊断测试准确性综合了评估一个或多个指标测试相对于参考标准准确性的初步诊断研究的数据,提供了测试性能的估计值,允许比较不同测试的准确性,并有助于确定测试准确性的变异源。

目的:制定《系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目》(PRISMA)诊断测试准确性指南,作为 PRISMA 声明的独立扩展。PRISMA 声明的修改反映了报告系统评价和荟萃分析诊断测试准确性研究的具体要求,以及这些综述的摘要。

设计:本指南的制定遵循了来自增强健康研究的质量和透明度(EQUATOR)网络的既定标准。原始 PRISMA 声明被用作修改和添加项目的框架。一个由 24 名多学科专家组成的小组使用对现有报告指南和方法的系统评价、三轮德尔菲(Delphi)过程、共识会议、试点测试和迭代改进来制定 PRISMA 诊断测试准确性指南。该 PRISMA 诊断测试准确性指南检查表的最终版本获得了小组的批准。

发现:系统评价(产生了 64 个项目)和德尔菲过程(对 7 个提议项目提供了反馈;1 个项目后来分为 2 个项目)确定了 71 个可能需要考虑的项目。德尔菲过程将这些项目减少到 60 个,在共识会议上进行了讨论。会议结束后,试点测试和迭代反馈用于生成 27 项 PRISMA 诊断测试准确性检查表。为了反映诊断测试准确性的特定或最佳当代系统评价方法,27 项原始 PRISMA 项目中有 8 项保持不变,17 项进行了修改,2 项增加,2 项删除。

结论和相关性:27 项 PRISMA 诊断测试准确性检查表为系统评价的报告提供了具体指导。PRISMA 诊断测试准确性指南可以促进综述的透明报告,并可能有助于评估有效性和适用性,增强综述的可重复性,并使诊断测试准确性研究的系统评价结果更有用。

相似文献

[1]
Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement.

JAMA. 2018-1-23

[2]
Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

J Clin Epidemiol. 2024-9

[3]
Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2024-7-9

[4]
Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2024-7-9

[5]
Recommendations for reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy: a systematic review.

Syst Rev. 2017-10-10

[6]
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD Statement.

JAMA. 2015-4-28

[7]
Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

Qual Life Res. 2024-8

[8]
Steps toward more complete reporting of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA).

Syst Rev. 2019-7-11

[9]
Completeness of Reporting of Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Based on the PRISMA-DTA Reporting Guideline.

Clin Chem. 2018-9-20

[10]
Reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of acupuncture: the PRISMA for acupuncture checklist.

BMC Complement Altern Med. 2019-8-12

引用本文的文献

[1]
Machine learning for myocarditis diagnosis using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a systematic review, diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis, and comparison with human physicians.

Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2025-9-9

[2]
Diagnostic accuracy of nanopore sequencing for the rapid diagnosis of extrapulmonary tuberculosis: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BMJ Open. 2025-9-2

[3]
Can artificial intelligence with multimodal imaging outperform traditional methods in predicting age-related macular degeneration progression? A systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis.

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2025-9-1

[4]
Geographical Distribution and Prevalence of Borrelia Genospecies in Eurasian Ticks.

Sci Data. 2025-9-2

[5]
Radar-Based Detection of Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy Across Frequency Bands.

Diagnostics (Basel). 2025-8-21

[6]
Artificial Intelligence in Gestational Diabetes Care: A Systematic Review.

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2025-8-25

[7]
Evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of AI in ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke: A comprehensive meta-analysis.

Neuroradiol J. 2025-8-25

[8]
Serum matrix metalloproteinase-7 (MMP-7) as a Biomarker for differentiating biliary atresia from neonatal hepatitis: evidence synthesis through systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pediatr Surg Int. 2025-8-24

[9]
Diagnostic Potential of Cross-Specimen microRNA Panels as Biomarkers for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Mol Diagn Ther. 2025-8-23

[10]
The diagnostic value of long noncoding RNAs as a biomarker for in-stent restenosis in patients with coronary heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies.

Medicine (Baltimore). 2025-8-15

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索