SCIENTIFIC REPORT

The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in ophthalmic journals

M A R Siddiqui¹, A Azuara-Blanco¹ and J Burr²

¹ Department of Ophthalmology, Grampian University Hospitals NHS Trust, UK
² Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Augusto Azuara-Blanco PhD
FRCS(Ed), The Eye Clinic, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen AB25 2ZN, UK; aazblanco{at}aol.com

Aim: To evaluate the quality of reporting of all diagnostic studies published in five major ophthalmic journals in the year 2002 using the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) initiative parameters.

Methods: Manual searching was used to identify diagnostic studies published in 2002 in five leading ophthalmic journals, the American Journal of Ophthalmology (AJO), Archives of Ophthalmology (Archives), British Journal of Ophthalmology (BJO), Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (IOVS), and Ophthalmology. The STARD checklist of 25 items and flow chart was used to evaluate the quality of each publication.

Results: A total of 16 publications were included (AJO = 5, Archives = 1, BJO = 2, IOVS = 2, and Ophthalmology = 6). More than half of the studies (n = 9) were related to glaucoma diagnosis. Other specialties included retina (n = 4) cornea (n = 2), and neuro-ophthalmology (n = 1). The most common description of diagnostic accuracy was sensitivity and specificity values, published in 13 articles. The number of fully reported items in evaluated studies ranged from eight to 19. Seven studies reported more than 50% of the STARD items.

Conclusions: The current standards of reporting of diagnostic accuracy tests are highly variable. The STARD initiative may be a useful tool for appraising the strengths and weaknesses of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Abbreviations: AJO, American Journal of Ophthalmology; Archives, Archives of Ophthalmology; BJO, British Journal of Ophthalmology; IOVS, Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; ROC, receiver operating characteristic; STARD, Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy

Keywords: diagnostic accuracy studies; ophthalmic journals; quality of reporting

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Evidence about evidence

B C Reeves
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2005 89: 253-254. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Wilczynski, N. L. (2008). Quality of Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies: No Change Since STARD Statement Publication--Before-and-after Study. Radiology 248: 817-823 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bochmann, F., Johnson, Z., Azuara-Blanco, A. (2007). Sample size in studies on diagnostic accuracy in ophthalmology: a literature survey. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 91: 898-900 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Smidt, N., Rutjes, A.W.S., van der Windt, D. A.W.M., Ostelo, R. W.J.G., Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bouter, L. M., de Vet, H. C.W. (2006). The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies since the STARD statement: has it improved?. Neurology 67: 792-797 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Shunmugam, M., Azuara-Blanco, A. (2006). The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies in glaucoma using the heidelberg retina tomograph.. IOVS 47: 2317-2323 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Lai, T. Y. Y., Leung, G. M., Wong, V. W. Y., Lam, R. F., Cheng, A. C. O., Lam, D. S. C. (2006). How Evidence-Based Are Publications in Clinical Ophthalmic Journals?. IOVS 47: 1831-1838 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Azuara-Blanco, A, Burr, J (2006). The rising cost of glaucoma drugs. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 90: 130-131 [Full Text]