STARD 2015: updated reporting guidelines for all diagnostic accuracy studies
Letter to the Editor

STARD 2015: updated reporting guidelines for all diagnostic accuracy studies

Patrick M. Bossuyt1, Jérémie F. Cohen1,2, Constantine A. Gatsonis3, Daniël A. Korevaar1; for the STARD group

1Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; 2INSERM UMR 1153 and Department of Pediatrics, Necker Hospital, AP-HP, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France; 3Center for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, RI, USA

Correspondence to: Patrick M. Bossuyt, PhD. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Email: p.m.bossuyt@amc.uva.nl.

Submitted Jan 26, 2016. Accepted for publication Feb 01, 2016.

doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2305-5839.2016.02.06


We would like to thank the Editorial Board and the authors of the editorials for their support for the STARD initiative. We firmly believe that reporting guidelines such as STARD can contribute to more complete and more transparent reporting, thereby reducing waste in research and enhancing evidence-informed decision-making (1).

The editorials highlight the relevance and the potential of the updated STARD list, which now includes 30 items (2). STARD can be used as a checklist by authors, reviewers, and editors. It can also be used by those preparing registration in clinical trial registries, when writing a protocol for a diagnostic accuracy study, or in teaching the structure of such studies.

We are currently finalizing an updated Explanation and Elaboration document to support the use of STARD 2015.

STARD specifies what key elements should be reported, but does not prescribe how diagnostic accuracy study should be performed (3). Depending on the intended use and clinical role of the test under evaluation, different designs and statistical analyses can be used.

The principles that underlie STARD apply to all forms of medical testing. Regardless of the technology, readers of a study report should be able to learn about the eligibility criteria to invite study participants, and about the procedures used to identify them, for example. No matter what the test is, the technique should be described in sufficient detail to enable replication. This means that for specific fields of testing, specific technologies, or for specific clinical applications, more detail will be required. As indicated in the article accompanying the release of STARD 2015, the STARD group welcomes the development of STARD extensions, and we know that the development for several such extensions is underway.


Acknowledgements

None.


Footnote

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.


References

  1. Glasziou P, Altman DG, Bossuyt P, et al. Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research. Lancet 2014;383:267-76. [PubMed]
  2. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Clin Chem 2015;61:1446-52. [PubMed]
  3. Bossuyt PM. Diagnostic accuracy reporting guidelines should prescribe reporting, not modeling. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:355-6; discussion 362-3. [PubMed]
Cite this article as: Bossuyt PM, Cohen JF, Gatsonis CA, Korevaar DA; for the STARD group. STARD 2015: updated reporting guidelines for all diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Transl Med 2016;4(4):85. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2305-5839.2016.02.06