ArticlePloS one2010
Methodological deficits in diagnostic research using '-omics' technologies: evaluation of the QUADOMICS tool and quality of recently published studies.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Metabolomic profiling in phenylketonuria: a systematic review of human studies.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2026Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of mass spectrometry proteomics applied to ocular fluids to assess potential biomarkers of age-related macular degeneration.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on MS-Based Proteomics Applied to Human Peripheral Fluids to Assess Potential Biomarkers of Bipolar Disorder.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Pooled it
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Mass Spectrometry Proteomics Applied to Human Peripheral Fluids to Assess Potential Biomarkers of Schizophrenia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Pooled it
- The Metabolic Signature of Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Pooled it
- The metabolic signature of cardiorespiratory fitness: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review on metabolomics-based diagnostic biomarker discovery and validation in pancreatic cancer.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2018Pooled it
- Metabolomics for biomarker discovery in the diagnosis, prognosis, survival and recurrence of colorectal cancer: a systematic review.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- Overlap of proteomics biomarkers between women with pre-eclampsia and PCOS: a systematic review and biomarker database integration.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Review
- Emerging Role of Metabolomics in Ovarian Cancer Diagnosis.Metabolites · 2020Review
- Metabolomics of biomarker discovery in ovarian cancer: a systematic review of the current literature.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2016Article
- Personalized medicine using DNA biomarkers: a review.Human genetics · 2012Review
- Clinical validity of detecting K-ras mutations for the diagnosis of exocrine pancreatic cancer: a prospective study in a clinically-relevant spectrum of patients.European journal of epidemiology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQUADOMICS is an adaptation of QUADAS (a quality assessment tool for use in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies), which takes into account the particular challenges presented by '-omics' based technologies. Our primary objective was to evaluate the applicability and consistency of QUADOMICS. Subsequently we evaluated and describe the methodological quality of a sample of recently published studies using the tool. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findings45'-omics'-based diagnostic studies were identified by systematic search of Pubmed using suitable MeSH terms ("Genomics", "Sensitivity and specificity", "Diagnosis"). Three investigators independently assessed the quality of the articles using QUADOMICS and met to compare observations and generate a consensus. Consistency and applicability was assessed by comparing each reviewer's original rating with the consensus. Methodological quality was described using the consensus rating. Agreement was above 80% for all three reviewers. Four items presented difficulties with application, mostly due to the lack of a clearly defined gold standard. Methodological quality of our sample was poor; studies met roughly half of the applied criteria (mean +/- sd, 54.7+/-18.4%). Few studies were carried out in a population that mirrored the clinical situation in which the test would be used in practice, (6, 13.3%); none described patient recruitment sufficiently; and less than half described clinical and physiological factors that might influence the biomarker profile (20, 44.4%).
conclusionsThe QUADOMICS tool can consistently be applied to diagnostic '-omics' studies presently published in biomedical journals. A substantial proportion of reports in this research field fail to address design issues that are fundamental to make inferences relevant for patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.