The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies in glaucoma using the Heidelberg retina tomograph

PURPOSE. Scanning laser tomography with the Heidelberg retina tomograph (HRT; Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) has been proposed as a useful diagnostic test for glaucoma. This study was conducted to evaluate the quality of reporting of published studies using the HRT for diagnosing glaucoma. METHODS. A validated Medline and hand search of English-language articles reporting on measures of diagnostic accuracy of the HRT for glaucoma was performed. Two reviewers selected and appraised the papers independently. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) checklist was used to evaluate the quality of each publication. RESULTS. A total of 29 articles were included. Interobserver rating agreement was observed in 83% of items (? = 0.76). The number of STARD items properly reported ranged from 5 to 18. Less than a third of studies (7/29) explicitly reported more than half of the STARD items. Descriptions of key aspects of the methodology were frequently missing. For example, the design of the study (prospective or retrospective) was reported in 6 of 29 studies, and details of participant sampling (e.g., consecutive or random selection) were described in 5 of 29 publications. The commonest description of diagnostic accuracy was sensitivity and specificity (25/29) followed by area under the ROC curve (13/29), with 9 of 29 publications reporting both. CONCLUSIONS. The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy tests for glaucoma with HRT is suboptimal. The STARD initiative may be a useful tool for appraising the strengths and weaknesses of diagnostic accuracy studies. Copyright © Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.

The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies published in ophthalmic journals

Aim: To evaluate the quality of reporting of all diagnostic studies published in five major ophthalmic journals in the year 2002 using the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) initiative parameters. Methods: Manual searching was used to identify diagnostic studies published in 2002 in five leading ophthalmic journals, the American Journal of Ophthalmology (AJO), Archives of Ophthalmology (Archives), British Journal of Ophthalmology (BJO), Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science (IOVS), and Ophthalmology. The STARD checklist of 25 items and flow chart was used to evaluate the quality of each publication. Results: A total of 16 publications were included (AJO = 5, Archives = 1, BJO = 2, IOVS = 2, and Ophthalmology = 6). More than half of the studies (n = 9) were related to glaucoma diagnosis. Other specialties included retina (n = 4) cornea (n = 2), and neuro-ophthalmology (n = 1). The most common description of diagnostic accuracy was sensitivity and specificity values, published in 13 articles. The number of fully reported items in evaluated studies ranged from eight to 19. Seven studies reported more than 50% of the STARD items. Conclusions: The current standards of reporting of diagnostic accuracy tests are highly variable. The STARD initiative may be a useful tool for appraising the strengths and weaknesses of diagnostic accuracy studies.

REporting and calibration of post-bomb C-14 data

The definitive paper by Stuiver and Polach (1977) established the conventions for reporting of 14C data for chronological and geophysical studies based on the radioactive decay of 14C in the sample since the year of sample death or formation. Several ways of reporting 14C activity levels relative to a standard were also established, but no specific instructions were given for reporting nuclear weapons testing (post-bomb) 14C levels in samples. Because the use of post-bomb 14C is becoming more prevalent in forensics, biology, and geosciences, a convention needs to be adopted. We advocate the use of fraction modern with a new symbol F14C to prevent confusion with the previously used Fm, which may or may not have been fractionation corrected. We also discuss the calibration of post-bomb 14C samples and the available datasets and compilations, but do not give a recommendation for a particular dataset.

Recognizing and reporting child physical abuse: a cross sectional survey of primary health care professionals

Objectives: To assess primary health care professionalsâ?? ability to recognise child physical abuse within their everyday practice. Design: Cross-sectional survey Participants: A stratified random sample of 979 nurses, doctors, and dentists working in primary care in NI. Results: Four hundred and thirty one primary health care professionals responded [44% response rate]. Thirty two per cent were doctors, 35% were dentists and 33% were nurse professionals. The mean age was 41.63 years. Fifty-nine percent (251) stated that they had seen a suspicious case of child physical abuse and 47% (201) said they had reported it. Seventy-two per cent (310) of participants were aware of the mechanisms for reporting child physical abuse. Ability and willingness to recognise and report abuse discriminated the three professions. Conclusions: The findings suggest a professional reluctance to engage in recognising and reporting abuse. Barriers could be reduced by providing training and professional support for the primary care professionals.