Journal of clinical epidemiology
-
To show how the bivariate random effects meta-analysis model can be used to study the relation between the explanatory variables and the performance of diagnostic tests as characterized by a summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROCC). ⋯ The bivariate random effects meta-analysis model is an appropriate and convenient framework to investigate the effect of covariates on the performance of diagnostic tests as measured by SROCCs.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Use of both Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment questionnaire and Short Form-36 among tibial-fracture patients was redundant.
To compare the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment Dysfunction Index (SMFA DI) and the Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS) scores among patients undergoing operative management of tibial fractures. ⋯ In patients with tibial-shaft fractures, the SMFA DI offered no significant advantages over the SF-36 PCS score. These results, along with the usefulness of SF-36 for comparing populations, recommend the SF-36 for assessing physical function in studies of patients with tibial fractures.
-
Mistriage can have serious consequences for patients with urgent complaints. We therefore reviewed the assessment of triage-reliability, and propose an alternative weighted kappa that accounts for severity of mistriage. ⋯ No existing studies on reliability of triage systems account for mistriage. Using triage-weighted kappa, which reflects severity of mistriage, shows that the reliability of triage systems is lower than reported.
-
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. ⋯ In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.