Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Inadequate Reporting of Analytical Characteristics of Biomarkers Used in Clinical Research: A Threat to Interpretation and Replication of Study Findings
23
Zitationen
5
Autoren
2019
Jahr
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Analytical characteristics of methods to measure biomarkers determine how well the methods measure what they claim to measure. Transparent reporting of analytical characteristics allows readers to assess the validity and generalizability of clinical studies in which biomarkers are used. Our aims were to assess the reporting of analytical characteristics of biomarkers used in clinical research and to evaluate the extent of reported characterization procedures for assay precision. METHODS: ) over a 10-year period for the term "biomarker" in the full-text field. We included studies in which biomarkers were used for inclusion/exclusion of study participants, for patient classification, or as a study outcome. We tabulated the frequencies of reporting of 11 key analytical characteristics (such as analytical accuracy of test results) in the included studies. RESULTS: A total of 544 studies and 1299 biomarker uses met the inclusion criteria. No information on analytical characteristics was reported for 67% of the biomarkers. For 65 biomarkers (3%), ≥4 characteristics were reported (range, 4-8). The manufacturer of the measurement procedure could not be determined for 688 (53%) of the 1299 biomarkers. The extent of assessments of assay imprecision, when reported, did not meet expectations for clinical use of biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: Reporting of the analytical performance of biomarker measurements is variable and often absent from published clinical studies. We suggest that readers need fuller reporting of analytical characteristics to interpret study results, assess generalizability of conclusions, and compare results among clinical studies.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 91.333 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 83.122 Zit.
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
1977 · 78.177 Zit.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
2009 · 63.670 Zit.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
2003 · 62.320 Zit.