SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2012
The reporting quality of studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of anti-CCP antibody in rheumatoid arthritis and its impact on diagnostic estimates.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of Adherence of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Published in Radiology Journals to STARD Statement Indexed in Web of Science, PubMed & Scopus in 2015.Journal of biomedical physics & engineering · 2018Article
- Does the medical literature remain inadequately described despite having reporting guidelines for 21 years? - A systematic review of reviews: an update.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2018Review
- Anti-CCP: a truly helpful rheumatoid arthritis test?Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2016Article
- Comparison of two assays to determine anti-citrullinated peptide antibodies in rheumatoid arthritis in relation to other chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases: assaying anti-modified citrullinated vimentin antibodies adds value to second-generation anti-citrullinated cyclic peptides testing.BioMed research international · 2014Article
- Declaration of transparency for each research article.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently anti-CCP testing has become popular in the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, the inadequate reporting of the relevant diagnostic studies may overestimate and bias the results, directing scientists into making false decisions. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the reporting quality of studies used anti-CCP2 for the diagnosis of RA and to explore the impact of reporting quality on pooled estimates of diagnostic measures.
methodsPubMed was searched for clinical studies investigated the diagnostic accuracy of anti-CCP. The studies were evaluated for their reporting quality according to STARD statement. The overall reporting quality and the differences between high and low quality studies were explored. The effect of reporting quality on pooled estimates of diagnostic accuracy was also examined.
resultsThe overall reporting quality was relatively good but there are some essential methodological aspects of the studies that are seldom reported making the assessment of study validity difficult. Comparing the quality of reporting in high versus low quality articles, significant differences were seen in a relatively large number of methodological items. Overall, the STARD score (high/low) has no effect on the pooled sensitivities and specificities. However, the reporting of specific STARD items (e.g. reporting sufficiently the methods used in calculating the measures of diagnostic accuracy and reporting of demographic and clinical characteristics/features of the study population) has an effect on sensitivity and specificity.
conclusionsThe reporting quality of the diagnostic studies needs further improvement since the study quality may bias the estimates of diagnostic accuracy.
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.