Quality of reporting of studies evaluating time to diagnosis: a systematic review in paediatrics

Launay, Élise; Morfouace, M.; Deneux‐Tharaux, Catherine; Guen, C. Gras-Le; Ravaud, Philippe

doi:10.1136/archdischild-2013-304778

Cited by 20 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another has reported that time to diagnosis in 436 Ewing tumours in France was not associated with metastasis, surgical outcome or survival ( Brasme et al , 2014 ). One of our main findings, of the poor quality of reporting of time to diagnosis studies, replicates the findings of a recent paediatric systematic review ( Launay et al , 2013 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:It is unclear whether more timely cancer diagnosis brings favourable outcomes, with much of the previous evidence, in some cancers, being equivocal. We set out to determine whether there is an association between time to diagnosis, treatment and clinical outcomes, across all cancers for symptomatic presentations.Methods:Systematic review of the literature and narrative synthesis.Results:We included 177 articles reporting 209 studies. These studies varied in study design, the time intervals assessed and the outcomes reported. Study quality was variable, with a small number of higher-quality studies. Heterogeneity precluded definitive findings. The cancers with more reports of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes were breast, colorectal, head and neck, testicular and melanoma.Conclusions:This is the first review encompassing many cancer types, and we have demonstrated those cancers in which more evidence of an association between shorter times to diagnosis and more favourable outcomes exists, and where it is lacking. We believe that it is reasonable to assume that efforts to expedite the diagnosis of symptomatic cancer are likely to have benefits for patients in terms of improved survival, earlier-stage diagnosis and improved quality of life, although these benefits vary between cancers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Time to diagnosis (TTD) is the interval from first alert symptoms to the diagnosis of a disease in a patient [ 1 – 3 ]. Studies on TTD may aim at (1) measuring the length of TTD and its evolution over time, (2) identifying the determinants of long TTD (i.e., relationship between TTD and patient or healthcare system characteristics), and/or (3) evaluating relationships between long versus short TTD and patient outcomes [ 1 , 4 ]. The number of published studies on TTD is rapidly increasing [ 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…TTD is also of increasing concern among patient advocacy groups, and some, such as the International Confederation of Childhood Cancer Parent Organizations, have established a reduction in TTD as a priority [ 5 ]. There are strong and common beliefs that longer TTD is associated with worse health outcomes, as revealed by various systematic reviews of the literature [ 1 – 3 ]. Furthermore, in PubMed, the definition of the Medical Subject Heading “early diagnosis” includes the following statement: ‘ Generally, early diagnosis improves prognosis and treatment outcome ’ [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, in PubMed, the definition of the Medical Subject Heading “early diagnosis” includes the following statement: ‘ Generally, early diagnosis improves prognosis and treatment outcome ’ [ 6 ]. However, many primary studies and systematic reviews do not report worse patient outcomes as a consequence of longer versus shorter TTD, or have found inverse relationships between longer TTD and better patient outcomes [ 1 , 2 ]. These paradoxical associations are due to incomplete adjustment and residual confounding, as observed in studies of TTD of pediatric brain and bone tumors [ 2 , 7 , 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reporting studies on time to diagnosis: proposal of a guideline by an international panel (REST)

Launay

Cohen

Bossuyt

et al. 2016

BMC Med

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundStudies on time to diagnosis are an increasing field of clinical research that may help to plan corrective actions and identify inequities in access to healthcare. Specific features of time to diagnosis studies, such as how participants were selected and how time to diagnosis was defined and measured, are poorly reported. The present study aims to derive a reporting guideline for studies on time to diagnosis.MethodsEach item of a list previously used to evaluate the completeness of reporting of studies on time to diagnosis was independently evaluated by a core panel of international experts (n = 11) for relevance and readability before an open electronic discussion allowed consensus to be reached on a refined list. The list was then submitted with an explanatory document to first, last and/or corresponding authors (n = 98) of published systematic reviews on time to diagnosis (n = 45) for relevance and readability, and finally approved by the core expert panel.ResultsThe refined reporting guideline consists of a 19-item checklist: six items are about the process of participant selection (with a suggested flowchart), six about the definition and measurement of time to diagnosis, and three about optional analyses of associations between time to diagnosis and participant characteristics and health outcomes. Of 24 responding authors of systematic reviews, more than 21 (≥88 %) rated the items as relevant, and more than 17 (≥70 %) as readable; 19 of 22 (86 %) authors stated that they would potentially use the reporting guideline in the future.ConclusionsWe propose a reporting guideline (REST) that could help authors, reviewers, and editors of time to diagnosis study reports to improve the completeness and the accuracy of their reporting.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-016-0690-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…2 As mentioned, all multivariable analyses of the associations between TtD and outcome were adjusted for trial arms. They emphasize that appropriate handling of covariables (such as treatments received and other prognostic factors) is a key issue in studies on the determinants and consequences of time to diagnosis (TtD).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reply to L. Alonso et al

Brasme

Oberlin

Valteau‐Couanet

et al. 2014

JCO

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of reporting of studies evaluating time to diagnosis: a systematic review in paediatrics

Cited by 20 publications

References 56 publications

Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

Is increased time to diagnosis and treatment in symptomatic cancer associated with poorer outcomes? Systematic review

Reporting studies on time to diagnosis: proposal of a guideline by an international panel (REST)

Reply to L. Alonso et al

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About