Best Practice for <scp>MRI</scp> Diagnostic Accuracy Research With Lessons and Examples from the <scp>LI‐RADS</scp> Individual Participant Data Group-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Best Practice for MRI Diagnostic Accuracy Research With Lessons and Examples from the LI‐RADS Individual Participant Data Group

Published:2023-10-11 Issue: Volume: Page:
ISSN:1053-1807
Container-title:Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
language:en
Short-container-title:Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Author:

van der Pol Christian B.¹²^ORCID,Costa Andreu F.³^ORCID,Lam Eric⁴,Dawit Haben⁴⁵,Bashir Mustafa R.⁶⁷⁸,McInnes Matthew D. F.⁴⁹

Affiliation:

1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre, Hamilton Health Sciences Hamilton Ontario Canada

2. McMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada

3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre and Dalhousie University Halifax Nova Scotia Canada

4. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute Clinical Epidemiology Program Ottawa Ontario Canada

5. Temerty Faculty of Medicine University of Toronto Toronto Ontario Canada

6. Departments of Radiology and Medicine Duke University Medical Center Durham North Carolina USA

7. Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development Duke University Medical Center Durham North Carolina USA

8. Department of Radiology University of North Carolina Chapel Hill North Carolina USA

9. Rm c‐159 Departments of Radiology and Epidemiology The Ottawa Hospital‐Civic Campus Ottawa Ontario Canada

Abstract

Medical imaging diagnostic test accuracy research is strengthened by adhering to best practices for study design, data collection, data documentation, and study reporting. In this review, key elements of such research are discussed, and specific recommendations provided for optimizing diagnostic accuracy study execution to improve uniformity, minimize common sources of bias and avoid potential pitfalls. Examples are provided regarding study methodology and data collection practices based on insights gained by the liver imaging reporting and data system (LI‐RADS) individual participant data group, who have evaluated raw data from numerous MRI diagnostic accuracy studies for risk of bias and data integrity. The goal of this review is to outline strategies for investigators to improve research practices, and to help reviewers and readers better contextualize a study's findings while understanding its limitations.Level of Evidence5Technical EfficacyStage 3

Funder

Radiological Society of North America

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Link

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/jmri.29049

Reference61 articles.

1. Measures of diagnostic accuracy: Basic definitions;Simundic AM;EJIFCC,2009

2. Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta‐analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: The PRISMA‐DTA statement;McInnes MDF;JAMA,2018

3. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta‐analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA‐DTA): Explanation, elaboration, and checklist;Salameh JP;BMJ,2020

4. 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;Cohen JF;BMJ,2021

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Individual Participant Data Meta-Analyses for Diagnostic Accuracy Research: Challenges and Lessons Learned from the LI-RADS IPD Group;Radiology: Imaging Cancer;2024-05-01