Quality standards are needed for reporting of test accuracy studies for animal diseases

Beyond accuracy: leveraging ASSURED criteria for field evaluation of point-of-care tests for food animal diseases

The growing availability of point-of-care tests (POCTs) for food-animal diseases offers opportunities for timely diagnosis, facilitating the efficient implementation of control measures. However, field assessment of new POCTs are yet to be standardized. This paper discusses the opportunity of expanding the current approach for the evaluation and validation of POCTs in food animal disease diagnosis, highlighting the limitations of traditional practice that primarily relies on estimating diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity). Here, the use of a protocol referred to as FIT-REASSURED, a modified framework combining the ASSURED and REASSURED criteria, is proposed to comprehensively assess POCTs. FIT-REASSURED encompasses key criteria such as fitness for purpose, real-time connectivity, ease of specimen collection, affordability, sensitivity, specificity, user-friendliness, rapidity and robustness, equipment-free operation, and deliverability. By incorporating these attributes, FIT-REASSURED provides a customizable approach to assess the accuracy, affordability, and utility of POCTs. Through collaborative efforts among stakeholders, the implementation of a standardized scorecard based on these FIT-REASSURED criteria can improve the reliability and practicality of POCTs in food-animal health.

Design, statistical analysis and reporting standards for test accuracy studies for infectious diseases in animals: Progress, challenges and recommendations

The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies (DAS) for infectious diseases of animals has improved over the last 20 years because of international educational efforts, use of design and reporting standards to guide researchers and test developers, and acceptance of the use of latent class models to account for imperfect reference tests. In this review, we focus on measurement of diagnostic sensitivity and specificity as a measure of clinical validity, describe the leadership role of the World Organisation of Animal Health (OIE) in setting standards for test validation in the context of fitness-for-purpose, and describe how design and reporting quality have facilitated the increased use of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of DAS. Ongoing challenges for design, conduct, analysis and reporting of DAS are identified; and we make recommendations for improvements in these areas for OIE-listed and non-listed infectious diseases.

Improvements are needed in reporting of accuracy studies for diagnostic tests used for detection of finfish pathogens

Indices of test accuracy, such as diagnostic sensitivity and specificity, are important considerations in test selection for a defined purpose (e.g., screening or confirmation) and affect the interpretation of test results. Many biomedical journals recommend that authors clearly and transparently report test accuracy studies following the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) guidelines ( www.stard-statement.org ). This allows readers to evaluate overall study validity and assess potential bias in diagnostic sensitivity and specificity estimates. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the reporting quality of studies evaluating test accuracy for finfish diseases using the 25 items in the STARD checklist. Based on a database search, 11 studies that included estimates of diagnostic accuracy were identified for independent evaluation by three reviewers. For each study, STARD checklist items were scored as "yes," "no," or "not applicable." Only 10 of the 25 items were consistently reported in most (≥80%) papers, and reporting of the other items was highly variable (mostly between 30% and 60%). Three items ("number, training, and expertise of readers and testers"; "time interval between index tests and reference standard"; and "handling of indeterminate results, missing data, and outliers of the index tests") were reported in less than 10% of papers. Two items ("time interval between index tests and reference standard" and "adverse effects from testing") were considered minimally relevant to fish health because test samples usually are collected postmortem. Modification of STARD to fit finfish studies should increase use by authors and thereby improve the overall reporting quality regardless of how the study was designed. Furthermore, the use of STARD may lead to the improved design of future studies.

A survey of the awareness, knowledge, policies and views of veterinary journal Editors-in-Chief on reporting guidelines for publication of research

BACKGROUND

Wider adoption of reporting guidelines by veterinary journals could improve the quality of published veterinary research. The aims of this study were to assess the knowledge and views of veterinary Editors-in-Chief on reporting guidelines, identify the policies of their journals, and determine their information needs. Editors-in-Chief of 185 journals on the contact list for the International Association of Veterinary Editors (IAVE) were surveyed in April 2012 using an online questionnaire which contained both closed and open questions.

RESULTS

The response rate was 36.8% (68/185). Thirty-six of 68 editors (52.9%) stated they knew what a reporting guideline was before receiving the questionnaire. Editors said they had found out about reporting guidelines primarily through articles in other journals, via the Internet and through their own journal. Twenty of 57 respondents (35.1%) said their journal referred to reporting guidelines in its instructions to authors. CONSORT, REFLECT, and ARRIVE were the most frequently cited. Forty-four of 68 respondents (68.2%) believed that reporting guidelines should be adopted by all refereed veterinary journals. Qualitative analysis of the open questions revealed that lack of knowledge, fear, resistance to change, and difficulty in implementation were perceived as barriers to the adoption of reporting guidelines by journals. Editors suggested that reporting guidelines be promoted through communication and education of the veterinary community, with roles for the IAVE and universities. Many respondents believed a consensus policy on guideline implementation was needed for veterinary journals.

CONCLUSIONS

Further communication and education about reporting guidelines for editors, authors and reviewers has the potential to increase their adoption by veterinary journals in the future.

Consensus-based reporting standards for diagnostic test accuracy studies for paratuberculosis in ruminants

The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) statement (www.stard-statement.org) was developed to encourage complete and transparent reporting of key elements of test accuracy studies in human medicine. The statement was motivated by widespread evidence of bias in test accuracy studies and the finding that incomplete or absent reporting of items in the STARD checklist was associated with overly optimistic estimates of test performance characteristics. Although STARD principles apply broadly, specific guidelines do not exist to account for unique considerations in livestock studies such as herd tests, potential use of experimental challenge studies, a more diverse group of testing purposes and sampling designs, and the widespread lack of an ante-mortem reference standard with high sensitivity and specificity. The objective of the present study was to develop a modified version of STARD relevant to paratuberculosis (Johne's disease) in ruminants. Examples and elaborations for each of the 25 items were developed by a panel of experts using a consensus-based approach to explain the items and underlying concepts. The new guidelines, termed STRADAS-paraTB (Standards for Reporting of Animal Diagnostic Accuracy Studies for paratuberculosis), should facilitate improved quality of reporting of the design, conduct and results of paratuberculosis test accuracy studies which were identified as "poor" in a review published in 2008 in Veterinary Microbiology.