Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement

Session: 

Oral session: Diagnostic test accuracy review methods (1)

Date: 

Tuesday 18 September 2018 - 11:00 to 11:20

Location: 

Carrick 2

All authors in correct order:

McInnes M1, Moher D2, Thombs B3, Bossuyt P4, Clifford T5, Cohen J6, Deeks J7, Gatsonis C8, Hooft L9, Hunt H10, Hyde C10, Korevaar D11, Leeflang M11, Macaskill P12, Reitsma J13, Rodin R14, Rutjes A15, Salameh J16, Stevens A17, Takwoingi Y7, Tonelli M18, Weeks L5, Whiting P19, Willis B7
1 The University of Ottawa Department of Radiology, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute Clinical Epidemiology Program, Canada
2 The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute Clinical Epidemiology Program (Centre for Journalology), Canada
3 Lady Davis Institute of the Jewish General Hospital and Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Canada
4 Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, TheNetherlands
5 Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, Canada
6 Department of Pediatrics, Necker- Enfants Malades Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris Descartes University, France
7 University of Birmingham, UK
8 Brown University, USA
9 Cochrane Netherlands, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care,UMC Utrecht, The Netherlands
10 University of Exeter, UK
11 AMC Amsterdam, The Netherlands
12 University of Sydney, Australia
13 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Cochrane Netherlands, The Netherlands
14 Public Health Agency of Canada, Canada
15 ISPM & BIHAM, University of Bern, Switzerland
16 University of Ottawa, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute Clinical Epidemiology Program, Canada
17 Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; Translational Research in Biomedicine (TRIBE) Program, University of Split School of Medicine, Canada
18 University of Calgary, Canada
19 University of Bristol & NIHR CLAHRC West, UK
Presenting author and contact person

Presenting author:

Matthew McInnes

Contact person:

Matthew McInnes
Abstract text
Background: Diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic reviews synthesize data from primary diagnostic studies that have evaluated the accuracy of one or more index tests against a reference standard. DTA systematic reviews provide estimates of test performance, allow comparisons of the accuracy of different tests, and facilitate the identification of sources of variability in test accuracy.

Objectives: To develop PRISMA-DTA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) as a stand-alone extension of the PRISMA statement, modified to reflect the particular requirements for reporting DTA systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as well as PRISMA-DTA for abstracts.

Methods: We followed established standards for guideline development (EQUATOR Network). The PRISMA statement was used as a framework upon which to modify and add material. A group of 24 multi-disciplinary experts used a systematic review of existing reporting guidelines and methods articles, a three-round Delphi process, a consensus meeting, pilot testing, and iterative refinement to develop PRISMA-DTA. The final version of the PRISMA-DTA checklist was approved by the PRISMA-DTA group. Similar methods were followed to modify PRISMA for abstracts to generate PRISMA-DTA for abstracts.

Results: Systematic review (64 items) and Delphi feedback (six new items proposed and one item split into two) 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, piloting and iterative feedback was used to generate the 27-item PRISMA-DTA checklist. To reflect DTA-specific or optimal contemporary systematic review methods, eight of the 27 original PRISMA items were left unchanged, 17 were modified, two were added and two omitted. A 12-item PRISMA-DTA for abstracts was developed.

Conclusions: PRISMA-DTA provides specific guidance for reporting of DTA systematic reviews. PRISMA-DTA can facilitate transparent reporting of DTA reviews, and may assist evaluations of validity and applicability, enhance replicability of reviews, and make the results more useful for multiple stakeholders.

Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: Members of the Canadian Task force for Preventive Care and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health participated.

Attachments: 

PDF icon PRISMA DTA Checklist.pdf
PDF icon PRISMA DTA for Abstracts Checklist.pdf

Relevance to patients and consumers: 

More complete reporting of diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews will enable stakeholders such as guidelines authors, funding agencies and clinicians to make more informed decisions regarding the utility of diagnostic tests for patients. Improved knowledge of test benefits and harms will help optimize application of these tests, and minimize potentially harmful false positive and false negative test results.