The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies
Open accessAbstract
Incomplete reporting has been identified as a major source of avoidable waste in biomedical research. Essential information is often not provided in study reports, impeding the identification, critical appraisal, and replication of studies. To improve the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies, the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement was developed. Here we present STARD 2015, an updated list of 30 essential items that should be included in every report of a diagnostic accuracy study. This update incorporates recent evidence about sources of bias and variability in diagnostic accuracy and is intended to facilitate the use of STARD. As such, STARD 2015 may help to improve completeness and transparency in reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This study’s design and methods are reported in line with the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) checklist [13].”
From Abstract screening using the automated tool Rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews (2022) · cites this paper as [13]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures
Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000) · Spine · doi:10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014 · Cited by 14,542
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
the CONSORT Group, Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D. (2010) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-8-18 · Cited by 13,371
Self-citationMoons, K. G. M., Altman, D. G., Reitsma, J. B., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Macaskill, P., Steyerberg, E. W., Vickers, A. J., Ransohoff, D. F., & Collins, G. S. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-0698 · Cited by 5,147
Self-citationCollins, G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g7594 · Cited by 4,388
Self-citationCollins, P. G. S., Reitsma, J. B., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2015) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.639 · Cited by 3,319
Self-citationTowards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative.
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., de Vet, H. C. W., et al. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-1-200301070-00010 · Cited by 3,219
Self-citationTowards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41 · Cited by 3,215
Self-citationEmpirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests.
Lijmer, J. G. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1061 · Cited by 1,861
Self-citationReducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research
Glasziou, P., Altman, D. G., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Clarke, M., Julious, S., Michie, S., Moher, D., & Wager, E. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62228-x · Cited by 1,319
Self-citationPolicy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility
Collins, F. S., & Tabak, L. A. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/505612a · Cited by 1,247
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM): a guide for authors and reviewers
Mongan, J., Moy, L., & Kahn, C. E. (2020) · Radiology: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1148/ryai.2020200029 · Cited by 1,443
Considerations for diagnostic COVID-19 tests
Vandenberg, O., Martiny, D., Rochas, O., van Belkum, A., & Kozlakidis, Z. (2020) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-020-00461-z · Cited by 820
Charidimou, A., Boulouis, G., Frosch, M. P., Baron, J.-C., Pasi, M., Albucher, J. F., Banerjee, G., Barbato, C., Bonneville, F., Brandner, S., et al. (2022) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00208-3 · Cited by 723
Wu, A. H. B., Christenson, R. H., Greene, D. N., Jaffe, A. S., Kavsak, P. A., Ordóñez‐Llanos, J., & Apple, F. S. (2018) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2017.277186 · Cited by 459
Schaffter, T., Buist, D. S. M., Lee, C. I., Nikulin, Y., Ribli, D., Guan, Y., Lotter, W., Jie, Z., Du, H., Wang, S., et al. (2020) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0265 · Cited by 409
Metadata
- Authors
- Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., de Vet, H. C. W., Kressel, H. Y., Rifai, N., Golub, R. M., Altman, D. G., Hooft, L., Korevaar, D. A., & Cohen, J. F.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Utrecht University (NL)
- University of Virginia (US)
- Brown University (US)
- Bond University (AU)
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- OLVG (NL)
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
- Boston Children's Hospital (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Inserm (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Bossuyt, Patrick M
- ORCID
- Venue
- Clinical Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2015-12-01
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1446-1452
- ISSN
- 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8561
- OpenAlex
- W2188214922
- Cited by
- 984
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 54 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 124 · 2023: 110 · 2022: 100 · 2021: 134 · 2020: 124 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 96 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 58.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- Clinical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
- Bond University Research Portal (Bond University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- IRIS UNIMORE (University of Modena and Reggio Emilia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion)
- Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- University of Amsterdam
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- STARD 2015, diagnostic accuracy studies, reporting guidelines, reporting completeness, research transparency, critical appraisal
- MeSH terms
- Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Humans, Terminology as Topic, Quality Control, Research Design, Reproducibility of Results, Bias
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
