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. Though DTA systematic-reviews share elements with those of interventions, there are important differences. Study-design and measures of effect differ from those of randomized-trials. Accuracy can differ between studies due to differences in patients, setting, prior testing and use of different reference standards. Consequently, methods for evaluating risk of bias, summarizing results, and exploring variability differ from those used for interventions. As such, reporting of DTA reviews may not optimally guided by PRISMA. The recently published PRISMA-DTA extension provides specific guidance for reporting of DTA systematic reviews.

Objectives:
To familiarize systematic review authors with PRISMA-DTA, 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.

Description:
This workshop will begin with a brief introduction to the PRISMA-DTA statement and PRISMA-DTA for abstracts. This introduction will cover the content of the checklists (see attachments) as well as the rationale for modifications made to PRISMA. Subsequently, participants will form small groups (three to five people) and evaluate a DTA systematic review regarding adherence to PRISMA-DTA. Groups will be asked to present their findings, and discuss how areas of deficient reporting might impact interpretation of the study. Furthermore, each group will be asked to rewrite the abstract to make it compliant with PRISMA-DTA for abstracts (as well as the journal word count limitation).