Meta-review evaluates adherence to reporting standards in diagnostic accuracy studies, indicating insufficient compliance.
Key Points
This meta-review assesses how well diagnostic test accuracy studies follow the STARD 2015 reporting standards.
Search of MEDLINE and EMBASE for reviews utilizing STARD 2015
Inclusion of reviews evaluating primary diagnostic accuracy studies in humans
Use of random-effects meta-analysis for data analysis with subgroup comparisons
Overall mean adherence to STARD 2015 was 53.2% (95% CI: 45.9-60.5)
Adherence was higher in diagnostic imaging studies (61.7% [95% CI: 56.8-66.6]) than lab/biomarker (48.5% [95% CI: 33.5-63.4]; P = .02) and other fields (39.4% [95% CI: 23.9-54.9]; P < .001)
No significant change in adherence over time (P = .28)