Identifying studies for systematic reviews of diagnostic tests was difficult due to the poor sensitivity and precision of methodologic filters and the lack of information in the abstract
- 1 May 2005
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Vol. 58 (5) , 444-449
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.09.011
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD InitiativeAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2003
- Identifying Diagnostic Studies in MEDLINE: Reducing the Number Needed to ReadJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2002
- Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelinesBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2002
- Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening recordsStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Publications on diagnostic test evaluation in family medicine journals: an optimal search strategyJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2000
- Identifying relevant diagnostic studies in MEDLINE. The diagnostic value of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and dipstick as an exampleFamily Practice, 1997
- Developing Optimal Search Strategies for Detecting Clinically Sound Studies in MEDLINEJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 1994
- The Value of Capture-Recapture Methods Even for Apparent Exhaustive SurveysAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 1992
- Goodness‐of‐fit based confidence intervals for estimates of the size of a closed populationStatistics in Medicine, 1984
- The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical DataPublished by JSTOR ,1977