Steps toward more complete reporting of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA)

20Citations
Citations of this article
44Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Reporting standards in biomedical research have been shown to be suboptimal. The publication of the PRISMA statement has improved the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews, but several issues specific to diagnostic test accuracy are not included in the PRISMA statement. Therefore, a diagnostic test accuracy extension of the PRISMA statement, PRISMA-DTA, was created. This commentary addresses completeness of reporting in systematic reviews, the PRISMA-DTA statement, and strategies for optimal uptake of reporting guidelines.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

McGrath, T. A., Moher, D., & McInnes, M. D. F. (2019, July 11). Steps toward more complete reporting of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA). Systematic Reviews. BioMed Central Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1090-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free