Reporting the Accuracy of Diagnostic Tests: The STARD Initiative 10 Years On

Abstract

Complete and accurate reporting of the design and implementation of studies is an essential component in guiding decisions in healthcare. Transparent reporting of studies that evaluate the accuracy of medical tests is recommended because such studies are more prone to bias than some other forms of research. Given that diagnostic accuracy is not a fixed property of tests, readers should know where and for whom the test was evaluated (1). Poor reporting of accuracy studies thus impedes the objective appraisal of such studies and limits the generalizability of study results. Suboptimal descriptions of study findings may also make tests seem more favorable than they really are, which eventually may lead to premature adoption of medical tests into practice, unnecessary testing, and high healthcare costs (2). Ten years have passed since the initial publication of the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD)2 initiative. Inspired by the Consolidated Standards for the Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) Statement, the STARD statement was developed with the aim of improving the reporting of diagnostic-accuracy studies. It consists of a checklist of 25 items that ought to be reported and recommends the use of a flow diagram that describes the design of the study and the flow of patients in the study. STARD was created by a group of experts, researchers, editors, methodologists, and members of professional organizations. The STARD statement was first published in 2003 in 13 biomedical journals, including Clinical Chemistry . To date, >200 biomedical journals have encouraged the use of STARD in their instructions for authors, and the statement has been cited approximately 1654 times (ISI Web of Knowledge, February 2013). More information on the STARD initiative can be found at http://www.stard-statement.org. After 10 …