Reporting Standards for Diagnostic Testing Guidance for Authors From Editors of Respiratory, Sleep, and Critical Care Journals

Diagnostic testing is fundamental to medicine. However, studies of diagnostic testing in respiratory medicine vary significantly in terms of their methodology, definitions, and reporting of results. This has led to often conflicting or ambiguous results. To address this issue, a group of 20 respiratory journal editors worked to develop reporting standards for studies of diagnostic testing based on a rigorous methodology to guide authors, peer reviewers, and researchers when conducting studies of diagnostic testing in respiratory medicine. Four key areas are covered, including defining the reference standard of truth, measures of dichotomous test performance when used for dichotomous outcomes, measures of multichotomous test performance for dichotomous outcomes, and what constitutes a useful definition of diagnostic yield. The importance of using contingency tables for reporting results is addressed with examples from the literature. A practical checklist is provided as well for reporting studies of diagnostic testing.

Automated summary

Diagnostic testing is crucial in medicine, but there is significant variation in the methodology, definitions, and reporting of results in studies of diagnostic testing in respiratory medicine, leading to conflicting or ambiguous results. To address this issue, a group of 20 respiratory journal editors developed reporting standards for such studies, providing a rigorous methodology for authors, peer reviewers, and researchers. The standards cover four key areas, including defining the reference standard of truth, measures of test performance for dichotomous outcomes, measures of test performance for multichotomous outcomes, and a useful definition of diagnostic yield. The importance of using contingency tables for reporting results is emphasized, along with a practical checklist for reporting diagnostic testing studies.