Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
JAMA. 2018 Jan 23;319(4):388-396. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19163.
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.
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。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2024-7-9
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2024-7-9
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2019-8-12
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2025-8-25