Reporting and concordance of methodologic criteria between abstracts and articles in diagnostic test studies

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the quality and concordance of methodologic criteria in abstracts versus articles regarding the diagnosis of trichomoniasis.STUDY DESIGN: Survey of published literature. DATA SOURCES: Studies indexed in MEDLINE (1976-1998).STUDY SELECTION: Studies that used culture as the gold or reference standard. DATA EXTRACTION:Data from abstract and articles were independently abstracted using 4 methodologic criteria: (1) prospective evaluation of consecutive patients; (2) test results did not influence the decision to do gold standard; (3) independent and blind comparison with gold standard; and (4) broad spectrum of patients used. The total number of criteria met for each report was calculated to create a quality score (0-4). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:None of the 33 abstracts or full articles reported all 4 criteria. Three criteria were reported in none of the abstracts and in 18% of articles (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 8.6% to 34%). Two criteria were reported in 18% of abstracts (95% CI, 8.6% to 34%) and 42% of articles (95% CI, 27% to 59%). One criterion was reported in 42% of abstracts (95% CI, 27% to 59%) and 27% of articles (95% CI, 15% to 44%). No criteria were reported in 13 (39%) of 33 abstracts (95% CI, 25% to 56%) and 4 (12%) of 33 articles (95% CI, 4.8% to 27%). The agreement of the criteria between the abstract and the article was poor ( Ϫ 0.09; 95% CI, Ϫ 0.18 to 0) to moderate ( 0.53; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS:Information on methods basic to study validity is often absent from both abstract and paper. The concordance of such criteria between the abstract and article needs to improve. W hen faced with clinical questions regarding which is the best treatment for a patient or which diagnostic test is worth performing, physicians are being encouraged to look for evidence rather than rely solely on clinical experience or "expert" opinion. Although some clinical questions have no supporting data, it is felt that the quality of care would be improved if physicians used the "best available evidence" in making decisions. 1,2 One of the major barriers is the time required to find, read, evaluate, and understand the evidence. 3 The abstract is an important element in the communication from scientists to practitioners. High-quality abstracts reliably and succinctly reflect an article's methodology and content. The abstract provides enough information to allow readers to accurately assess if the article is relevant to their interests, has findings that could affect their practice, and uses methods that meet basic validity standards. The role of the abstract is as valuable to clinicians when it correctly directs them not to read an article as when it encourages reading a relevant article. Structured abstracts require authors to be explicit as to the design and findings described in the article and are used in journals to facilitate the communication of research findings. [4][5][6] In comparison with unstructured abstracts, some authors have shown that structured abstracts improve th...

Does VATS provide optimal treatment of empyema in children? a systematic review

“…53,54 Because the methodologic criteria in these studies were not always explicitly described, it was difficult to assess the quality of the study and to determine its validity. Although fibrinolytics have been shown to be safe and effective, the studies describing their use tended to have lower quality scores.…”

The cognitive impact of research synopses on physicians: a prospective observational analysis of evidence-based summaries sent by email

“…Our results can be interpreted in line with three of four characteristics of research-based information that may influence research utilisation according to the literature: relevance, truthfulness, complexity of decision making, and balance between 'advantagerisk'. 4,11 Given that research-based information is less likely to be rated negatively by practising physicians when the number of comparisons and results reported is greater, the complexity of research-based information is an important factor.…”

“…2 Synopses read by email have been shown to raise awareness of new developments, contribute to continuing medical education and improve professional practice. 3 While concerns have been expressed about the comprehensiveness and accuracy of medical journal abstracts, 4 studies that systematically assess emaildelivered research synopses are only now emerging. 5 Previously, most studies examined the characteristics of research-based information that influenced research utilisation, notably with respect to printed educational materials and compliance with guidelines.…”

Searching the literature for information on traumatic spinal cord injury: the usefulness of abstracts

“…Abstracts should (and sometimes do) give readers enough information to assess if the paper is relevant to their interests, o ers information that might a ect the way they practice medicine, and (if a report of empirical research) uses methods that meet basic standards of validity. 2 These traditional narrative abstracts have been criticized for a number of reasons, including conclusions that do not follow from the study ®ndings and an overemphasis on positive conclusions. 3 ± 5 They often did not convey the information readers would expect.…”

“…13 Others do not evidence correspondence between the abstract and the paper, in that the data reported are di erent, or there are data in the abstract entirely lacking from the paper. 2,19 However, informative and correct abstracts are of extreme importance: they are the component of papers most likely to be read, 1,19,20 and sometimes they are the only part read. 21,22 Not infrequently, clinicians make decisions based on nothing more than a perusal of the abstract.…”