» Articles » PMID: 24996667

Meta-epidemiologic Analysis Indicates That MEDLINE Searches Are Sufficient for Diagnostic Test Accuracy Systematic Reviews

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Public Health
Date 2014 Jul 6
PMID 24996667
Citations 21
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: To investigate how the summary estimates in diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) systematic reviews are affected when searches are limited to MEDLINE.

Study Design And Setting: A systematic search was performed to identify DTA reviews that had conducted exhaustive searches and included a meta-analysis. Primary studies included in selected reviews were assessed to determine whether they were indexed on MEDLINE. The effect of omitting non-MEDLINE studies from meta-analyses was investigated by calculating the summary relative diagnostic odds ratio (RDORs) = DORMEDLINE only/DORall studies. We also calculated the summary difference in sensitivity and specificity between all studies and only MEDLINE-indexed studies.

Results: Ten reviews contributing 15 meta-analyses met inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. The RDOR comparing MEDLINE-only studies with all studies was 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95, 1.15). Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity remained almost unchanged (difference in sensitivity: -0.08%; 95% CI -1% to 1%; difference in specificity: -0.1%; 95% CI -0.8% to 1%).

Conclusion: Restricting to studies indexed on MEDLINE did not influence the summary estimates of the meta-analyses in our sample. In certain circumstances, for instance, when resources are limited, it may be appropriate to restrict searches to MEDLINE. However, the impact on individual reviews cannot be predicted.

Citing Articles

An exploration of available methods and tools to improve the efficiency of systematic review production: a scoping review.

Affengruber L, van der Maten M, Spiero I, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Mahmic-Kaknjo M, Ellen M BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024; 24(1):210.

PMID: 39294580 PMC: 11409535. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-024-02320-4.


Comparability of Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) and Written Tests for Assessing Medical School Students' Competencies: A Scoping Review.

Chang O, Holbrook A, Lohit S, Deng J, Xu J, Lee M Eval Health Prof. 2023; 46(3):213-224.

PMID: 36959750 PMC: 10443966. DOI: 10.1177/01632787231165797.


Transparency and completeness of reporting of depression screening tool accuracy studies: A meta-research review of adherence to the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies statement.

Nassar E, Levis B, Neyer M, Rice D, Booij L, Benedetti A Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2022; 32(1):e1939.

PMID: 36047034 PMC: 9976600. DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1939.


Trial-level characteristics associate with treatment effect estimates: a systematic review of meta-epidemiological studies.

Wang H, Song J, Lin Y, Dai W, Gao Y, Qin L BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022; 22(1):171.

PMID: 35705904 PMC: 9202161. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-022-01650-5.


Sample size and precision of estimates in studies of depression screening tool accuracy: A meta-research review of studies published in 2018-2021.

Nassar E, Levis B, Neyer M, Rice D, Booij L, Benedetti A Int J Methods Psychiatr Res. 2022; 31(2):e1910.

PMID: 35362161 PMC: 9159687. DOI: 10.1002/mpr.1910.