A review of solutions for diagnostic accuracy studies with an imperfect or missing reference standard.

By Johannes B Reitsma, A. Rutjes, Khalid Khan, A. Coomarasamy, Patrick M. M. Bossuyt. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2009

386 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Practical Instructions for the 2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (2018, methodology): “As a solution to the lack of a straightforward reference in conditions such as TLOC/syncope, dedicated long-term follow-up, preferably with an expert review committee, can be used as a test of reliability of diagnosis, relying on ancillary testing and/or additional information during follow-up, incl”
Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): Explanation and Elaboration (2015, background): “Sometimes, however, there is some interval between the predictor and outcome assessment (for example, when the outcome measure is based in part on follow-up information [209]).”
Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies: The CHARMS Checklist (2014, methodology): “This is often used in diagnostic studies for target diseases where the reference standard used in practice is known to include a subjective assessment of information [52,54,88,89].”