TY - JOUR
T1 - Stard 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies
T2 - Explanation and elaboration. translation to russian
AU - Cohen, Jérémie F.
AU - Korevaar, Daniël A.
AU - Altman, Douglas G.
AU - Bruns, David E.
AU - Gatsonis, Constantine A.
AU - Hooft, Lotty
AU - Irwig, Les
AU - Levine, Deborah
AU - Reitsma, Johannes B.
AU - De Vet, Henrica C.W.
AU - Bossuyt, Patrick M.M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Authors, 2021.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Diagnostic accuracy studies are, like other clinical studies, at risk of bias due to shortcomings in design and conduct, and the results of a diagnostic accuracy study may not apply to other patient groups and settings. Readers of study reports need to be informed about study design and conduct, in sufficient detail to judge the trustworthiness and applicability of the study findings. The STARD statement (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) was developed to improve the completeness and transparency of reports of diagnostic accuracy studies. STARD contains a list of essential items that can be used as a checklist, by authors, reviewers and other readers, to ensure that a report of a diagnostic accuracy study contains the necessary information. STARD was recently updated. All updated STARD materials, including the checklist, are available at http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard. Here, we present the STARD 2015 explanation and elaboration document. Through commented examples of appropriate reporting, we clarify the rationale for each of the 30 items on the STARD 2015 checklist, and describe what is expected from authors in developing sufficiently informative study reports. This article is the reprint with Russian translation edited by Dr. Ruslan Saygitov. The original that can be observed here: Cohen JF, Korevaar DA, Altman DG, et al. STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: Explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open 2016;6:e012799. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012799.
AB - Diagnostic accuracy studies are, like other clinical studies, at risk of bias due to shortcomings in design and conduct, and the results of a diagnostic accuracy study may not apply to other patient groups and settings. Readers of study reports need to be informed about study design and conduct, in sufficient detail to judge the trustworthiness and applicability of the study findings. The STARD statement (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) was developed to improve the completeness and transparency of reports of diagnostic accuracy studies. STARD contains a list of essential items that can be used as a checklist, by authors, reviewers and other readers, to ensure that a report of a diagnostic accuracy study contains the necessary information. STARD was recently updated. All updated STARD materials, including the checklist, are available at http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard. Here, we present the STARD 2015 explanation and elaboration document. Through commented examples of appropriate reporting, we clarify the rationale for each of the 30 items on the STARD 2015 checklist, and describe what is expected from authors in developing sufficiently informative study reports. This article is the reprint with Russian translation edited by Dr. Ruslan Saygitov. The original that can be observed here: Cohen JF, Korevaar DA, Altman DG, et al. STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: Explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open 2016;6:e012799. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012799.
KW - Applicability
KW - Bias
KW - Clinical studies
KW - Diagnostic accuracy studies
KW - STARD
KW - Study design
KW - Trustworthiness
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85153454565&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.17816/DD71031
DO - 10.17816/DD71031
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85153454565
SN - 2712-8490
VL - 2
SP - 313
EP - 342
JO - Digital Diagnostics
JF - Digital Diagnostics
IS - 3
ER -