Keyword search (4,163 papers available)

"Accuracy" Keyword-tagged Publications:

Title Authors PubMed ID
1 Are MEDLINE searches sufficient for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the diagnostic accuracy of depression screening tools? A review of meta-analyses Rice DB; Kloda LA; Levis B; Qi B; Kingsland E; Thombs BD; 27411746
LIBRARY
2 Reporting quality in abstracts of meta-analyses of depression screening tool accuracy: a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses Rice DB; Kloda LA; Shrier I; Thombs BD; 27864250
LIBRARY
3 Class imbalance should not throw you off balance: Choosing the right classifiers and performance metrics for brain decoding with imbalanced data Thölke P; Mantilla-Ramos YJ; Abdelhedi H; Maschke C; Dehgan A; Harel Y; Kemtur A; Mekki Berrada L; Sahraoui M; Young T; Bellemare Pépin A; El Khantour C; Landry M; Pascarella A; Hadid V; Combrisson E; O' Byrne J; Jerbi K; 37385392
IMAGING
4 How uncertainty affects information search among consumers: a curvilinear perspective He S; Rucker DD; 36471868
JMSB
5 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 EL; Levis B; Neyer MA; Rice DB; Booij L; Benedetti A; Thombs BD; 36047034
PSYCHOLOGY
6 Sample size and precision of estimates in studies of depression screening tool accuracy: A meta-research review of studies published in 2018-2021 Nassar EL; Levis B; Neyer MA; Rice DB; Booij L; Benedetti A; Thombs BD; 35362161
PSYCHOLOGY
7 Inclusion of currently diagnosed or treated individuals in studies of depression screening tool accuracy: a meta-research review of studies published in 2018-2021 Nassar EL; Levis B; Rice DB; Booij L; Benedetti A; Thombs BD; 35334411
PSYCHOLOGY
8 A Simulation Toolkit for Testing the Sensitivity and Accuracy of Corticometry Pipelines OmidYeganeh M; Khalili-Mahani N; Bermudez P; Ross A; Lepage C; Vincent RD; Jeon S; Lewis LB; Das S; Zijdenbos AP; Rioux P; Adalat R; Van Eede MC; Evans AC; 34381348
PERFORM
9 Data-driven methods distort optimal cutoffs and accuracy estimates of depression screening tools: a simulation study using individual participant data Bhandari PM; Levis B; Neupane D; Patten SB; Shrier I; Thombs BD; Benedetti A; 33838273
CONCORDIA
10 Equivalency of the diagnostic accuracy of the PHQ-8 and PHQ-9: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis Wu Y; Levis B; Riehm KE; Saadat N; Levis AW; Azar M; Rice DB; Boruff J; Cuijpers P; Gilbody S; Ioannidis JPA; Kloda LA; McMillan D; Patten SB; Shrier I; Ziegelstein RC; Akena DH; Arroll B; Ayalon L; Baradaran HR; Baron M; Bombardier CH; Butterworth P; Carter G; Chagas MH; Chan JCN; Cholera R; Conwell Y; de Man-van Ginkel JM; Fann JR; Fischer FH; Fung D; Gelaye B; Goodyear-Smith F; Greeno CG; Hall BJ; Harrison PA; Härter M; Hegerl U; Hides L; Hobfoll SE; Hudson M; Hyphantis T; Inagaki M; Jetté N; Khamseh ME; Kiely KM; Kwan Y; Lamers F; Liu SI; Lotrakul M; Loureiro SR; Löwe B; McGuire A; Mohd-Sidik S; Munhoz TN; Muramatsu K; Osório FL; Patel V; Pence BW; Persoons P; Picardi A; Reuter K; Rooney AG; Santos IS; Shaaban J; Sidebottom A; Simning A; Stafford L; Sung S; Tan PLL; Turner A; van Weert HC; White J; Whooley MA; Winkley K; Yamada M; Benedetti A; Thombs BD; 31298180
LIBRARY
11 Diagnostic accuracy of the Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) for detecting major depression: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analyses. Thombs BD, Benedetti A, Kloda LA, Levis B, Azar M, Riehm KE, Saadat N, Cuijpers P, Gilbody S, Ioannidis JP, McMillan D, Patten SB, Shrier I, Steele RJ, Ziegelstein RC, Loiselle CG, Henry M, Ismail Z, Mitchell N, Tonelli M 27075844
LIBRARY
12 Gesture-based registration correction using a mobile augmented reality image-guided neurosurgery system. Léger É, Reyes J, Drouin S, Collins DL, Popa T, Kersten-Oertel M 30800320
PERFORM

 

Title: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
Authors:Nassar ELLevis BNeyer MARice DBBooij LBenedetti AThombs BD
Link:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36047034/
DOI:10.1002/mpr.1939
Publication:International journal of methods in psychiatric research
Keywords:STARDdepressiondiagnostic test accuracyreporting guidelinesscreening
PMID:36047034 Category: Date Added:2022-09-01
Dept Affiliation: PSYCHOLOGY
1 Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
2 Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
3 Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Medicine, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK.
4 Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
5 Department of Psychology, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
6 CHU Sainte-Justine Hospital Research Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
7 Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
8 Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
9 Respiratory Epidemiology and Clinical Research Unit, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
10 Department of Educational and Counselling

Description:

Objectives: Accurate and complete study reporting allows evidence users to critically appraise studies, evaluate possible bias, and assess generalizability and applicability. We evaluated the extent to which recent studies on depression screening accuracy were reported consistent with Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement requirements.

Methods: MEDLINE was searched from January 1, 2018 through May 21, 2021 for depression screening accuracy studies.

Results: 106 studies were included. Of 34 STARD items or sub-items, the number of adequately reported items per study ranged from 7 to 18 (mean = 11.5, standard deviation [SD] = 2.5; median = 11.5), and the number inadequately reported ranged from 3 to 17 (mean = 10.1, SD = 2.5; median = 10.0). There were eight items adequately reported, seven partially reported, 11 inadequately reported, and four not applicable in =50% of studies; the remaining four items had mixed reporting. Items inadequately reported in =70% of studies related to the rationale for index test cut-offs examined, missing data management, analyses of variability in accuracy results, sample size determination, participant flow, study registration, and study protocol.

Conclusion: Recently published depression screening accuracy studies are not optimally reported. Journals should endorse and implement STARD adherence.





BookR developed by Sriram Narayanan
for the Concordia University School of Health
Copyright © 2011-2026
Cookie settings
Concordia University