Diagnostic accuracy research in Glaucoma is still incompletely reported: An application of Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015

Manuele Michelessi, Ersilia Lucenteforte, Alba Miele, Francesco Oddone, Giada Crescioli, Valeria Fameli, Daniel A. Korevaar, Gianni Virgili

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Background: Research has shown a modest adherence of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies in glaucoma to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD). We have applied the updated 30-item STARD 2015 checklist to a set of studies included in a Cochrane DTA systematic review of imaging tools for diagnosing manifest glaucoma. Methods: Three pairs of reviewers, including one senior reviewer who assessed all studies, independently checked the adherence of each study to STARD 2015. Adherence was analyzed on an individual-item basis. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of publication year and impact factor on adherence. Results: We included 106 DTA studies, published between 2003-2014 in journals with a median impact factor of 2.6. Overall adherence was 54.1% for 3,286 individual rating across 31 items, with a mean of 16.8 (SD: 3.1; range 8-23) items per study. Large variability in adherence to reporting standards was detected across individual STARD 2015 items, ranging from 0 to 100%. Nine items (1: identification as diagnostic accuracy study in title/abstract; 6: eligibility criteria; 10: index test (a) and reference standard (b) definition; 12: cut-off definitions for index test (a) and reference standard (b); 14: estimation of diagnostic accuracy measures; 21a: severity spectrum of diseased; 23: cross-tabulation of the index and reference standard results) were adequately reported in more than 90% of the studies. Conversely, 10 items (3: scientific and clinical background of the index test; 11: rationale for the reference standard; 13b: blinding of index test results; 17: analyses of variability; 18; sample size calculation; 19: study flow diagram; 20: baseline characteristics of participants; 28: registration number and registry; 29: availability of study protocol; 30: sources of funding) were adequately reported in less than 30% of the studies. Only four items showed a statistically significant improvement over time: missing data (16), baseline characteristics of participants (20), estimates of diagnostic accuracy (24) and sources of funding (30). Conclusions: Adherence to STARD 2015 among DTA studies in glaucoma research is incomplete, and only modestly increasing over time.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0189716
JournalPLoS One
Issue number12
Publication statusPublished - Dec 1 2017

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'Diagnostic accuracy research in Glaucoma is still incompletely reported: An application of Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this