Time to publication among completed diagnostic accuracy studies: associated with reported accuracy estimates
Daniël A Korevaar1, Nick van Es2, Aeilko H Zwinderman3
1Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105, AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. d.a.korevaar@amc.uva.nl.
BMC Medical Research Methodology
|June 9, 2016
Summary
Studies with more promising diagnostic accuracy results are published faster. This publication bias can skew literature reviews, affecting how medical test performance is perceived.
Area of Science:
- Medical research methodology
- Publication bias analysis
- Diagnostic accuracy studies
Background:
- Previous research indicates therapeutic intervention studies with statistically significant results are published faster, leading to reporting bias.
- This study investigates if diagnostic accuracy studies also exhibit faster publication for promising results.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the association between reported diagnostic accuracy estimates and the time to publication for primary diagnostic accuracy studies.
- To determine if studies with higher sensitivity, specificity, and Youden's index are published more rapidly.
Main Methods:
- Extracted diagnostic accuracy data (sensitivity, specificity, Youden's index), study completion, and publication dates from primary studies within Medline-indexed systematic reviews.
- Calculated the time from study completion to publication for 471 studies.
- Assessed the correlation between accuracy estimates and publication time using Spearman's rho and multivariable Cox regression.
Main Results:
- Studies reporting higher sensitivity, specificity, and Youden's index had significantly shorter times to publication.
- The median time from completion to publication was 24 months.
- Differential time lags favoring higher accuracy studies remained significant after adjusting for other study characteristics.
Conclusions:
- Diagnostic accuracy studies with more favorable results are published faster than those with less favorable results.
- This suggests that literature searches based on published studies may yield a biased view of medical test performance.
- The findings highlight a potential reporting bias in diagnostic accuracy research, impacting systematic reviews and clinical decision-making.
Related Concept Videos
01:13Sensitivity, Specificity, and Predicted Value
1.7K
In healthcare diagnostics, laboratory tests play a crucial role in identifying and diagnosing a wide range of medical conditions. However, interpreting test results is not always straightforward. An abnormal test result does not always confirm the presence of a disease, just as a normal result does not guarantee its absence. To assess the reliability of these diagnostic tools, healthcare practitioners rely on two key statistical indicators: sensitivity and specificity.
Sensitivity is the...
Sensitivity is the...
1.7K
01:13Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
667
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
667
01:15Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot
569
A ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) plot is a graphical tool used to assess the performance of a binary classification model by illustrating the trade-off between sensitivity (true positive rate) and specificity (false positive rate). By plotting sensitivity against 1 - specificity across various threshold settings, the ROC curve shows how well the model distinguishes between classes, with a curve closer to the top-left corner indicating a more accurate model. The area under the ROC curve...
569
01:52Accuracy and Precision
3.1K
3.1K
01:52Accuracy and Precision
16.9K
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value. Highly accurate...
16.9K
01:29Bias in Epidemiological Studies
1.5K
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
1.5K