title: The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in ophthalmic journals.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Ophthalmology, Grampian University Hospital NHS Trust, UK.
authors.forename: M A R
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Siddiqui
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Azuara-Blanco
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Burr
mesh_terms: D003941:Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological / Q000592:standards*; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D006801:Humans; D015588:Observer Variation; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D011643:Publishing / Q000592:standards*; D011786:Quality Control; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 1978 Oct 26;299(17):926-30
references.pmid: 692598
references.citation: BMJ. 2003 Jan 4;326(7379):41-4
references.pmid: 12511463
references.citation: JAMA. 1988 Mar 18;259(11):1699-702
references.pmid: 3278149
references.citation: Annu Rev Public Health. 1994;15:561-79
references.pmid: 8054099
references.citation: JAMA. 1995 Aug 23-30;274(8):645-51
references.pmid: 7637146
references.citation: BMJ. 1999 May 15;318(7194):1322-3
references.pmid: 10323817
references.citation: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999 Jul;40(8):1650-7
references.pmid: 10393031
references.citation: JAMA. 1999 Sep 15;282(11):1061-6
references.pmid: 10493205
references.citation: Med Decis Making. 1987 Apr-Jun;7(2):107-14
references.pmid: 3574020
references.citation: J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 Jan;53(1):65-9
references.pmid: 10693905
references.citation: Br J Ophthalmol. 2000 Oct;84(10):1198-202
references.pmid: 11004111
references.citation: Ophthalmology. 2001 Feb;108(2):410-5
references.pmid: 11158822
references.citation: JAMA. 2001 Apr 18;285(15):1992-5
references.pmid: 11308436
references.citation: JAMA. 2001 Apr 18;285(15):1996-9
references.pmid: 11308437
references.citation: BMJ. 2001 Jul 21;323(7305):157-62
references.pmid: 11463691
references.citation: Ophthalmology. 2002 Apr;109(4):761-5
references.pmid: 11927437
references.citation: Ophthalmology. 2002 Sep;109(9):1679-84
references.pmid: 12208717
references.citation: Ophthalmology. 2002 Nov;109(11):1996-2003
references.pmid: 12414405
references.citation: Ophthalmology. 2002 Nov;109(11):2018-23
references.pmid: 12414408
references.citation: Clin Chem. 2003 Jan;49(1):7-18
references.pmid: 12507954