How to Perform a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Imaging Studies

被引：44
作者：
Cronin, Paul [1 ]
Kelly, Aine Marie [1 ]
Altaee, Duaa [2 ]
Foerster, Bradley [1 ]
Petrou, Myria [1 ]
Dwamena, Ben A. [1 ,3 ]
机构：
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, B1 132G Taubman Ctr 5302,1500 East Med Ctr Dr, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Dept Neurol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[3] VA Ann Arbor Hlth Care Syst, Nucl Med Serv, Ann Arbor, MI USA
来源：
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY | 2018年 / 25卷 / 05期
关键词：
Diagnostic accuracy; evidence-based medicine; evidence-based radiology; heterogeneity; literature search; meta analysis; meta-regression; publication bias; receiver operating characteristic analysis; ROC analysis; sensitivity analyses; systematic review; subgroup analysis; threshold effect; PUBLICATION BIAS; DATA EXTRACTION; TEST ACCURACY; QUANTIFYING HETEROGENEITY; HEALTH-CARE; ERRORS; SPECIFICITY; SENSITIVITY; PREVALENCE; GUIDELINES;
D O I：
10.1016/j.acra.2017.12.007
中图分类号：
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号：
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要：
A systematic review is a comprehensive search, critical evaluation, and synthesis of all the relevant studies on a specific (clinical) topic that can be applied to the evaluation of diagnostic and screening imaging studies. It can be a qualitative or a quantitative (meta analysis) review of available literature. A meta-analysis uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies. In this review, a 12-step approach to performing a systematic review (and meta-analysis) is outlined under the four domains: (1) Problem Formulation and Data Acquisition, (2) Quality Appraisal of Eligible Studies, (3) Statistical Analysis of Quantitative Data, and (4) Clinical Interpretation of the Evidence. This review is specifically geared toward the performance of a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (imaging) studies.
引用
收藏
页码：573 / 593
页数：21
相关论文
共 54 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], METHODS EVALUATING M
  • [2] [Anonymous], WORKING PAPER SERIES
  • [3] [Anonymous], MIDAS STATE MODULE M
  • [4] [Anonymous], MIDAS METAANALYTICAL
  • [5] Bivariate random effects meta-analysis of ROC curves
    Arends, L. R.
    Hamza, T. H.
    van Houwelingen, J. C.
    Heijenbrok-Kal, M. H.
    Hunink, M. G. M.
    Stijnen, T.
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2008, 28 (05) : 621 - 638
  • [6] Meta-analysis: Neither quick nor easy
    Berman N.G.
    Parker R.A.
    [J]. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2 (1) : 1 - 9
  • [7] Single data extraction generated more errors than double data extraction in systematic reviews
    Buscemi, Nina
    Harding, Lisa
    Vandermeer, Ben
    Tjosvold, Lisa
    Klassen, Terry P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 59 (07) : 697 - 703
  • [8] Bivariate meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity with sparse data: a generalized linear mixed model approach
    Chu, Haitao
    Cole, Stephen R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2006, 59 (12) : 1331 - 1332
  • [9] METHODOLOGIC GUIDELINES FOR SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIALS IN HEALTH-CARE FROM THE POTSDAM CONSULTATION ON METAANALYSIS
    COOK, DJ
    SACKETT, DL
    SPITZER, WO
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1995, 48 (01) : 167 - 171
  • [10] The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed
    Deeks, JJ
    Macaskill, P
    Irwig, L
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (09) : 882 - 893
123456