Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines

Walter L. Devillé, Frank Buntinx, Lex M. Bouter, Victor Manuel Montori, Henrica C W De Vet, Danielle A W M Van Der Windt, P. Dick Bezemer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

645 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Although guidelines for critical appraisal of diagnostic research and meta-analyses have already been published, these may be difficult to understand for clinical researchers or do not provide enough detailed information. Methods: Development of guidelines based on a systematic review of the evidence in reports of systematic searches of the literature for diagnostic research, of methodological criteria to evaluate diagnostic research, of methods for statistical pooling of data on diagnostic accuracy, and of methods for exploring heterogeneity. Results: Guidelines for conducting diagnostic systematic reviews are presented in a stepwise fashion and are followed by comments providing further information. Examples are given using the results of two systematic reviews on the accuracy of the urine dipstick in the diagnosis of urinary tract infections, and on the accuracy of the straight-leg-raising test in the diagnosis of intervertebral disc hernia.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number9
Pages (from-to)1-13
Number of pages13
JournalBMC Medical Research Methodology
Volume2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 3 2002

Fingerprint

Guidelines
Meta-Analysis
Research
Intervertebral Disc
Hernia
Urinary Tract Infections
Leg
Research Personnel
Urine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Health Informatics

Cite this

Devillé, W. L., Buntinx, F., Bouter, L. M., Montori, V. M., De Vet, H. C. W., Van Der Windt, D. A. W. M., & Bezemer, P. D. (2002). Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2, 1-13. [9]. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-2-1

Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies : Didactic guidelines. / Devillé, Walter L.; Buntinx, Frank; Bouter, Lex M.; Montori, Victor Manuel; De Vet, Henrica C W; Van Der Windt, Danielle A W M; Bezemer, P. Dick.

In: BMC Medical Research Methodology, Vol. 2, 9, 03.07.2002, p. 1-13.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Devillé, WL, Buntinx, F, Bouter, LM, Montori, VM, De Vet, HCW, Van Der Windt, DAWM & Bezemer, PD 2002, 'Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines', BMC Medical Research Methodology, vol. 2, 9, pp. 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-2-1
Devillé, Walter L. ; Buntinx, Frank ; Bouter, Lex M. ; Montori, Victor Manuel ; De Vet, Henrica C W ; Van Der Windt, Danielle A W M ; Bezemer, P. Dick. / Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies : Didactic guidelines. In: BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2002 ; Vol. 2. pp. 1-13.
@article{055956eacc9e4157be50f646ab3af269,
title = "Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: Didactic guidelines",
abstract = "Background: Although guidelines for critical appraisal of diagnostic research and meta-analyses have already been published, these may be difficult to understand for clinical researchers or do not provide enough detailed information. Methods: Development of guidelines based on a systematic review of the evidence in reports of systematic searches of the literature for diagnostic research, of methodological criteria to evaluate diagnostic research, of methods for statistical pooling of data on diagnostic accuracy, and of methods for exploring heterogeneity. Results: Guidelines for conducting diagnostic systematic reviews are presented in a stepwise fashion and are followed by comments providing further information. Examples are given using the results of two systematic reviews on the accuracy of the urine dipstick in the diagnosis of urinary tract infections, and on the accuracy of the straight-leg-raising test in the diagnosis of intervertebral disc hernia.",
author = "Devill{\'e}, {Walter L.} and Frank Buntinx and Bouter, {Lex M.} and Montori, {Victor Manuel} and {De Vet}, {Henrica C W} and {Van Der Windt}, {Danielle A W M} and Bezemer, {P. Dick}",
year = "2002",
month = "7",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1186/1471-2288-2-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "1--13",
journal = "BMC Medical Research Methodology",
issn = "1471-2288",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies

T2 - Didactic guidelines

AU - Devillé, Walter L.

AU - Buntinx, Frank

AU - Bouter, Lex M.

AU - Montori, Victor Manuel

AU - De Vet, Henrica C W

AU - Van Der Windt, Danielle A W M

AU - Bezemer, P. Dick

PY - 2002/7/3

Y1 - 2002/7/3

N2 - Background: Although guidelines for critical appraisal of diagnostic research and meta-analyses have already been published, these may be difficult to understand for clinical researchers or do not provide enough detailed information. Methods: Development of guidelines based on a systematic review of the evidence in reports of systematic searches of the literature for diagnostic research, of methodological criteria to evaluate diagnostic research, of methods for statistical pooling of data on diagnostic accuracy, and of methods for exploring heterogeneity. Results: Guidelines for conducting diagnostic systematic reviews are presented in a stepwise fashion and are followed by comments providing further information. Examples are given using the results of two systematic reviews on the accuracy of the urine dipstick in the diagnosis of urinary tract infections, and on the accuracy of the straight-leg-raising test in the diagnosis of intervertebral disc hernia.

AB - Background: Although guidelines for critical appraisal of diagnostic research and meta-analyses have already been published, these may be difficult to understand for clinical researchers or do not provide enough detailed information. Methods: Development of guidelines based on a systematic review of the evidence in reports of systematic searches of the literature for diagnostic research, of methodological criteria to evaluate diagnostic research, of methods for statistical pooling of data on diagnostic accuracy, and of methods for exploring heterogeneity. Results: Guidelines for conducting diagnostic systematic reviews are presented in a stepwise fashion and are followed by comments providing further information. Examples are given using the results of two systematic reviews on the accuracy of the urine dipstick in the diagnosis of urinary tract infections, and on the accuracy of the straight-leg-raising test in the diagnosis of intervertebral disc hernia.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3342974413&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3342974413&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1471-2288-2-1

DO - 10.1186/1471-2288-2-1

M3 - Article

C2 - 12097142

AN - SCOPUS:3342974413

VL - 2

SP - 1

EP - 13

JO - BMC Medical Research Methodology

JF - BMC Medical Research Methodology

SN - 1471-2288

M1 - 9

ER -