Publication bias may exist among prognostic accuracy studies of middle cerebral artery Doppler ultrasound

Research on point-of-care tests in outpatient care in Germany: A scoping review and definition of relevant endpoints in evaluation studies

BACKGROUND

The fast turnaround time and user-friendliness of point-of-care tests (POCTs) offer a great potential to improve outpatient health care where clinical decisions have to be made during the physician-patient encounter and time resources are limited. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the extent and nature as well as gaps in German research activities on POCT in outpatient care. In addition, we define research endpoints that should be addressed in the comprehensive evaluation of POCTs targeted for outpatient care.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review with a systematic literature search in Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Google Scholar for German publications on POCT with relevance to German outpatient care published from January 2005 to November 2020.

RESULTS

Our literature search identified 2,200 unique records. After literature selection 117 articles were included in this scoping review. Just over half of the articles (67/117, 57.3%) were primary research studies with original data, while one third of all the studies (33.3%) were secondary research articles (e.g., review articles). The remaining articles were clinical recommendations / position papers (7/117, 6.0%) and other types of articles (3.4%). The majority of articles focused on POCT use in infectious diseases (44/117, 37.6%), diabetic syndromes (15.4%), cardiac disease (12.0%) or coagulopathies and thrombosis (10.3%), while the remaining articles did not specify the disease (13.7%) or investigated other diseases (11.1%). Similar to international studies, most primary research studies investigated the diagnostic performance of POCT (e.g., sensitivity, specificity). Evidence beyond diagnostic accuracy remains scarce, such as the impact on therapeutic decisions and practice routines, clinical effectiveness, and user perspectives. In line with this, interventional studies (such as RCTs) on the effectiveness of POCT use in German outpatient care are limited. We define six endpoint domains that should be addressed in the evaluation of POCTs targeted for outpatient care: (i) diagnostic performance, (ii) clinical performance, (iii) time and costs, (iv) impact on clinical routines / processes, (v) perspectives of medical professionals and patients, and (vi) broader aspects.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable research activity on POCTs targeted for use in outpatient care in Germany. Data on their potential benefits beyond diagnostic accuracy is often lacking and should be addressed in future POCT research studies.

Preferred reporting items for journal and conference abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts): checklist, explanation, and elaboration

For many users of the biomedical literature, abstracts may be the only source of information about a study. Hence, abstracts should allow readers to evaluate the objectives, key design features, and main results of the study. Several evaluations have shown deficiencies in the reporting of journal and conference abstracts across study designs and research fields, including systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies. Incomplete reporting compromises the value of research to key stakeholders. The authors of this article have developed a 12 item checklist of preferred reporting items for journal and conference abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts). This article presents the checklist, examples of complete reporting, and explanations for each item of PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts.

Investigating and dealing with publication bias and other reporting biases in meta-analyses of health research: A review

A P value, or the magnitude or direction of results can influence decisions about whether, when, and how research findings are disseminated. Regardless of whether an entire study or a particular study result is unavailable because investigators considered the results to be unfavorable, bias in a meta-analysis may occur when available results differ systematically from missing results. In this article, we summarize the empirical evidence for various reporting biases that lead to study results being unavailable for inclusion in systematic reviews, with a focus on health research. These biases include publication bias and selective nonreporting bias. We describe processes that systematic reviewers can use to minimize the risk of bias due to missing results in meta-analyses of health research, such as comprehensive searches and prospective approaches to meta-analysis. We also outline methods that have been designed for assessing risk of bias due to missing results in meta-analyses of health research, including using tools to assess selective nonreporting of results, ascertaining qualitative signals that suggest not all studies were identified, and generating funnel plots to identify small-study effects, one cause of which is reporting bias. HIGHLIGHTS: Bias in a meta-analysis may occur when available results differ systematically from missing results. Several different tools, plots, and statistical methods have been designed for assessing risk of bias due to missing results in meta-analyses. These include comparison of prespecified analysis plans with completed reports to detect selective nonreporting of results, consideration of qualitative signals that suggest not all studies were identified, and the use of funnel plots to identify small-study effects, for which reporting bias is one of several causes. Information from approaches such as funnel plots and selection models is more difficult to interpret than from less subjective approaches such as detection of incompletely reported results in studies for which prespecified analysis plans were available.

Cerebroplacental ratio as predictor of adverse perinatal outcome in the third trimester

Introduction

Fetal growth restriction is associated with adverse perinatal outcome and the clinical management of these pregnancies is a challenge. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential of cerebroplacental ratio (CPR) to predict adverse perinatal outcome in high‐risk pregnancies in the third trimester. Another aim was to study whether the CPR has better predictive value than its components, middle cerebral artery (MCA) pulsatility index (PI) and umbilical artery (UA) PI.

Material and methods

The study was a retrospective cohort study including 1573 singleton high‐risk pregnancies with Doppler examinations performed at 32⁺⁰ to 40⁺⁶ gestational weeks at Lund University Hospital and the University Hospital of Malmö between 29 December 1994 and 31 December 2017. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were used to investigate the predictive value of the gestational age‐specific z‐scores for CPR, UA PI and MCA PI, respectively, for the primary outcome “perinatal asphyxia/mortality” and the secondary outcomes “birthweight small for gestational age (SGA)” and two composite outcomes: “appropriate for gestational age/large for gestational age liveborn infants with neonatal morbidity” and “SGA liveborn infants with neonatal morbidity.”

Results

The performance in predicting perinatal asphyxia/mortality was poor for all three variables and did not differ significantly. The ROC area under curve (AUC) was 0.56, 0.55 and 0.53 for CPR, UA PI and MCA PI z‐scores, respectively. The ROC AUC for CPR z‐scores to predict SGA was 0.73, significantly higher than that for either UA PI or MCA PI (P < .001). The ability of CPR and the MCA PI to predict appropriate for gestational age/large for gestational age infant morbidity and SGA infant morbidity was similar and significantly better than UA PI (P < .001).

Conclusions

In the present study, none of the three Doppler measures proved to be useful in predicting perinatal asphyxia and mortality. CPR and MCA PI were equally good in predicting neonatal morbidity, especially in SGA pregnancies, and both were significantly better predictors than the UA PI. CPR had a high predictive value for SGA at birth, better than that of its two components, UA PI and MCA PI.

Assessment of Factors Causing Bias in Marketing- Related Publications

The present paper aims at revealing and ranking the factors that most frequently cause bias in marketing-related publications. In order to rank the factors causing bias, the authors employed the Analytic Hierarchy Process method with three different scales representing all scale groups. The data for the study were obtained through expert survey, which involved nine experts both from the academia and scientific publishing community. The findings of the study confirm that factors that most frequently cause bias in marketing related publications are sampling and sample frame errors, failure to specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria for researched subjects and non-responsiveness.