Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: The PRISMA-DTA Statement

By Matthew D F McInnes, David Moher, B. Thombs, Trevor A. McGrath, Patrick M. M. Bossuyt, Tammy Clifford, Jérémie F Cohen, J. J. Deeks, C. Gatsonis, Lotty Hooft and 15 more. Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), 2018

2,772 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, General Health Professions, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d86c14a0124931f9f71c74ff6894e1482768f110

How researchers see this paper

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

In Education

1. D. Test
2. David Moher
3. Matthew J. Page
4. Catherine H. Fowler

In General Health Professions

1. David Moher
2. Matthew J. Page
3. Larissa Shamseer
4. L. Stewart
5. Tianjing Li
6. J. Tetzlaff
7. Luke A. McGuinness
8. Patrick M. M. Bossuyt

In Statistics and Probability

1. David Moher
2. Matthew J. Page
3. Larissa Shamseer
4. I. Boutron
5. J. Yepes‐Nuñez
6. G. Úrrutia
7. Marta Romero-García
8. S. Alonso-Fernández

Citations in the corpus

• Updating the Secondary Transition Research Base: Evidence- and Research-Based Practices in Functional Skills (2020, methodology): “The PRISMA has developed a revised checklist providing specific guidance for reporting of systematic reviews (Mcinnes et al., 2018).”
• The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. (2021, methodology): “Finally, extensions to the PRISMA 2009 statement have been developed to guide reporting of network meta-analyses [49] , meta-analyses of individual participant data [50] , systematic reviews of harms [51] , systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies [52] , and scoping reviews [53] ; for ”
• Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. (2020, methodology): “question needed to be rated by more than 66% of survey respondents; this threshold was selected based on what had been used in previous studies to develop reporting guidelines (33, 39).”
• Does comorbidity increase the risk of patients with COVID-19: evidence from meta-analysis (2020, methodology): “The Meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement [12].”
• The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021, methodology): “Finally, extensions to the PRISMA 2009 statement have been developed to guide reporting of network metaanalyses,[49] meta-analyses of individual participant data,[50] systematic reviews of harms, [51] systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies, [52] and scoping reviews [53]; for these ty”
• False-negative results of initial RT-PCR assays for COVID-19: A systematic review (2020, methodology): “103 104 METHODS 105 We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) for 106 diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) to perform this report [20].”
• Measurement of Digital Literacy Among Older Adults: Systematic Review (2020, methodology): “This systematic review was conducted by searching multiple electronic databases according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [22].”