TY - JOUR
T1 - Association of Accuracy, Conclusions, and Reporting Completeness With Acceptance by Radiology Conferences and Journals
AU - The UnBIAS Research Group
AU - Frank, Robert A.
AU - Fabiano, Nicholas
AU - Hallgrimson, Zachary
AU - Korevaar, Daniël A.
AU - Cohen, Jérémie F.
AU - Bossuyt, Patrick M.
AU - Leeflang, Mariska M.G.
AU - Moher, David
AU - McInnes, Matthew D.F.
AU - Treanor, Lee
AU - Salameh, Jean Paul
AU - McGrath, Trevor A.
AU - Sharifabadi, Anahita Dehmoobad
AU - Atyani, Almohannad
AU - Kazi, Sakib
AU - Choo-Foo, Jade
AU - Asraoui, Nabil
AU - Alabousi, Mostafa
AU - Ha, Winston
AU - Prager, Ross
AU - Rooprai, Paul
AU - Pozdnyakov, Alex
AU - John, Susan
AU - Osman, Heba
AU - Islam, Nayaar
AU - Li, Nicole
AU - Gauthier, Isabelle D.
AU - Absi, Marissa
AU - Kraaijpoel, Noëmie
AU - Ebrahimzadeh, Sanam
AU - Port, John D.
AU - Stoker, Jaap
AU - Klein, Jeffrey S.
AU - Schweitzer, Mark
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding support was received from the Philips/RSNA research seed grant (RSNA Research & Education Foundation), Mitacs' Research Training Award, and Department of Radiology MD Summer Student Fund (University of Ottawa). Study performance and manuscript content were the sole task and responsibility of the investigators and do not necessarily represent the official views of the funders. The funders had no role in data collection, analysis, interpretation or manuscript composition.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
PY - 2022/8
Y1 - 2022/8
N2 - Background: Preferential publication of studies with positive findings can lead to overestimation of diagnostic test accuracy (i.e. publication bias). Understanding the contribution of the editorial process to publication bias could inform interventions to optimize the evidence guiding clinical decisions. Purpose/Hypothesis: To evaluate whether accuracy estimates, abstract conclusion positivity, and completeness of abstract reporting are associated with acceptance to radiology conferences and journals. Study Type: Meta-research. Population: Abstracts submitted to radiology conferences (European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) and International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM)) from 2008 to 2018 and manuscripts submitted to radiology journals (Radiology, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging [JMRI]) from 2017 to 2018. Primary clinical studies evaluating sensitivity and specificity of a diagnostic imaging test in humans with available editorial decisions were included. Assessment: Primary variables (Youden's index [YI > 0.8 vs. <0.8], abstract conclusion positivity [positive vs. neutral/negative], number of reported items on the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies [STARD] for Abstract guideline) and confounding variables (prospective vs. retrospective/unreported, sample size, study duration, interobserver agreement assessment, subspecialty, modality) were extracted. Statistical Tests: Multivariable logistic regression to obtain adjusted odds ratio (OR) as a measure of the association between the primary variables and acceptance by radiology conferences and journals; 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values were obtained; the threshold for statistical significance was P < 0.05. Results: A total of 1000 conference abstracts (500 ESGAR and 500 ISMRM) and 1000 journal manuscripts (505 Radiology and 495 JMRI) were included. Conference abstract acceptance was not significantly associated with YI (adjusted OR = 0.97 for YI > 0.8; CI = 0.70–1.35), conclusion positivity (OR = 1.21 for positive conclusions; CI = 0.75–1.90) or STARD for Abstracts adherence (OR = 0.96 per unit increase in reported items; CI = 0.82–1.18). Manuscripts with positive abstract conclusions were less likely to be accepted by radiology journals (OR = 0.45; CI = 0.24–0.86), while YI (OR = 0.85; CI = 0.56–1.29) and STARD for Abstracts adherence (OR = 1.06; CI = 0.87–1.30) showed no significant association. Positive conclusions were present in 86.7% of submitted conference abstracts and 90.2% of journal manuscripts. Data Conclusion: Diagnostic test accuracy studies with positive findings were not preferentially accepted by the evaluated radiology conferences or journals. Evidence Level: 3. Technical Efficacy: Stage 2.
AB - Background: Preferential publication of studies with positive findings can lead to overestimation of diagnostic test accuracy (i.e. publication bias). Understanding the contribution of the editorial process to publication bias could inform interventions to optimize the evidence guiding clinical decisions. Purpose/Hypothesis: To evaluate whether accuracy estimates, abstract conclusion positivity, and completeness of abstract reporting are associated with acceptance to radiology conferences and journals. Study Type: Meta-research. Population: Abstracts submitted to radiology conferences (European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR) and International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (ISMRM)) from 2008 to 2018 and manuscripts submitted to radiology journals (Radiology, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging [JMRI]) from 2017 to 2018. Primary clinical studies evaluating sensitivity and specificity of a diagnostic imaging test in humans with available editorial decisions were included. Assessment: Primary variables (Youden's index [YI > 0.8 vs. <0.8], abstract conclusion positivity [positive vs. neutral/negative], number of reported items on the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies [STARD] for Abstract guideline) and confounding variables (prospective vs. retrospective/unreported, sample size, study duration, interobserver agreement assessment, subspecialty, modality) were extracted. Statistical Tests: Multivariable logistic regression to obtain adjusted odds ratio (OR) as a measure of the association between the primary variables and acceptance by radiology conferences and journals; 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values were obtained; the threshold for statistical significance was P < 0.05. Results: A total of 1000 conference abstracts (500 ESGAR and 500 ISMRM) and 1000 journal manuscripts (505 Radiology and 495 JMRI) were included. Conference abstract acceptance was not significantly associated with YI (adjusted OR = 0.97 for YI > 0.8; CI = 0.70–1.35), conclusion positivity (OR = 1.21 for positive conclusions; CI = 0.75–1.90) or STARD for Abstracts adherence (OR = 0.96 per unit increase in reported items; CI = 0.82–1.18). Manuscripts with positive abstract conclusions were less likely to be accepted by radiology journals (OR = 0.45; CI = 0.24–0.86), while YI (OR = 0.85; CI = 0.56–1.29) and STARD for Abstracts adherence (OR = 1.06; CI = 0.87–1.30) showed no significant association. Positive conclusions were present in 86.7% of submitted conference abstracts and 90.2% of journal manuscripts. Data Conclusion: Diagnostic test accuracy studies with positive findings were not preferentially accepted by the evaluated radiology conferences or journals. Evidence Level: 3. Technical Efficacy: Stage 2.
KW - STARD
KW - conclusion positivity
KW - diagnostic accuracy
KW - meta-research
KW - peer review
KW - publication bias
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122765852&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85122765852&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jmri.28046
DO - 10.1002/jmri.28046
M3 - Article
C2 - 34997786
AN - SCOPUS:85122765852
SN - 1053-1807
VL - 56
SP - 380
EP - 390
JO - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
JF - Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
IS - 2
ER -