Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2022 Aug;56(2):380-390. doi: 10.1002/jmri.28046. Epub 2022 Jan 8.
Preferential publication of studies with positive findings can lead to overestimation of diagnostic test accuracy (i.e. publication bias). Understanding the contribution of the editorial process to publication bias could inform interventions to optimize the evidence guiding clinical decisions.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate whether accuracy estimates, abstract conclusion positivity, and completeness of abstract reporting are associated with acceptance to radiology conferences and journals.
Meta-research.
Abstracts submitted to radiology conferences (European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) and International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM)) from 2008 to 2018 and manuscripts submitted to radiology journals (Radiology, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging [JMRI]) from 2017 to 2018. Primary clinical studies evaluating sensitivity and specificity of a diagnostic imaging test in humans with available editorial decisions were included.
Primary variables (Youden's index [YI > 0.8 vs. <0.8], abstract conclusion positivity [positive vs. neutral/negative], number of reported items on the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies [STARD] for Abstract guideline) and confounding variables (prospective vs. retrospective/unreported, sample size, study duration, interobserver agreement assessment, subspecialty, modality) were extracted.
Multivariable logistic regression to obtain adjusted odds ratio (OR) as a measure of the association between the primary variables and acceptance by radiology conferences and journals; 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values were obtained; the threshold for statistical significance was P < 0.05.
A total of 1000 conference abstracts (500 ESGAR and 500 ISMRM) and 1000 journal manuscripts (505 Radiology and 495 JMRI) were included. Conference abstract acceptance was not significantly associated with YI (adjusted OR = 0.97 for YI > 0.8; CI = 0.70-1.35), conclusion positivity (OR = 1.21 for positive conclusions; CI = 0.75-1.90) or STARD for Abstracts adherence (OR = 0.96 per unit increase in reported items; CI = 0.82-1.18). Manuscripts with positive abstract conclusions were less likely to be accepted by radiology journals (OR = 0.45; CI = 0.24-0.86), while YI (OR = 0.85; CI = 0.56-1.29) and STARD for Abstracts adherence (OR = 1.06; CI = 0.87-1.30) showed no significant association. Positive conclusions were present in 86.7% of submitted conference abstracts and 90.2% of journal manuscripts.
Diagnostic test accuracy studies with positive findings were not preferentially accepted by the evaluated radiology conferences or journals.
3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
有阳性发现的研究的优先发表可能导致诊断测试准确性的高估(即发表偏倚)。了解编辑过程对发表偏倚的贡献,可以为优化指导临床决策的证据的干预措施提供信息。
目的/假设:评估准确性估计、摘要结论的阳性程度以及摘要报告的完整性是否与放射学会议和期刊的接受程度相关。
元研究。
2008 年至 2018 年向放射学会议(欧洲胃肠道和腹部放射学会[ESGAR]和国际磁共振学会[ISMRM])提交的摘要,以及 2017 年至 2018 年向放射学期刊(Radiology、磁共振成像杂志[JMRI])提交的论文。包括评估诊断影像学测试在人类中的敏感性和特异性的主要临床研究,并且可获得编辑决策。
主要变量(约登指数[YI>0.8 与 <0.8]、摘要结论的阳性程度[阳性与中性/阴性]、报告的标准报告诊断准确性研究[STARD]摘要指南的项目数量)和混杂变量(前瞻性与回顾性/未报告、样本量、研究持续时间、观察者间一致性评估、亚专业、模态)被提取。
多变量逻辑回归以获得主要变量与放射学会议和期刊接受程度之间关联的调整后比值比(OR);获得 95%置信区间(CI)和 P 值;统计显著性阈值为 P<0.05。
共纳入 1000 份会议摘要(500 份 ESGAR 和 500 份 ISMRM)和 1000 份期刊手稿(505 份 Radiology 和 495 份 JMRI)。会议摘要的接受程度与 YI(YI>0.8 的调整后 OR=0.97;CI=0.70-1.35)、结论阳性(阳性结论的调整后 OR=1.21;CI=0.75-1.90)或 STARD 摘要报告的遵守程度(报告项目每增加一个单位的调整后 OR=0.96;CI=0.82-1.18)无显著相关性。具有阳性摘要结论的手稿不太可能被放射学期刊接受(OR=0.45;CI=0.24-0.86),而 YI(OR=0.85;CI=0.56-1.29)和 STARD 摘要报告的遵守程度(OR=1.06;CI=0.87-1.30)则无显著相关性。提交的会议摘要中有 86.7%和期刊手稿中有 90.2%有阳性结论。
评估的放射学会议或期刊没有优先接受阳性发现的诊断测试准确性研究。
3 技术功效:阶段 2。