TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
- PMID: 36131330
- PMCID: PMC9494799
- DOI: 10.1186/s41512-022-00131-z
TOMAS-R: A template to identify and plan analysis for clinically important variation and multiplicity in diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews
Abstract
The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy (DTA) provides guidance on important aspects of conducting a test accuracy systematic review. In this paper we present TOMAS-R (Template of Multiplicity and Analysis in Systematic Reviews), a structured template to use in conjunction with current Cochrane DTA guidance, to help identify complexities in the review question and to assist planning of data extraction and analysis when clinically important variation and multiplicity is present. Examples of clinically important variation and multiplicity could include differences in participants, index tests and test methods, target conditions and reference standards used to define them, study design and methodological quality. Our TOMAS-R template goes beyond the broad topic headings in current guidance that are sources of potential variation and multiplicity, by providing prompts for common sources of heterogeneity encountered from our experience of authoring over 100 reviews. We provide examples from two reviews to assist users. The TOMAS-R template adds value by supplementing available guidance for DTA reviews by providing a tool to facilitate discussions between methodologists, clinicians, statisticians and patient/public team members to identify the full breadth of review question complexities early in the process. The use of a structured set of prompting questions at the important stage of writing the protocol ensures clinical relevance as a main focus of the review, while allowing identification of key clinical components for data extraction and later analysis thereby facilitating a more efficient review process.
Keywords: Diagnostic test accuracy; Heterogeneity; Meta-analysis; Methodology; Multiplicity; SROC; Systematic review; Template; forest.
© 2022. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
All authors have worked extensively on various aspects of many Cochrane DTA reviews, and also peer reviewed published Cochrane DTA protocols and full reviews. JD, SM and YT are members of the Cochrane DTA Editorial Board, and the Cochrane Screening and Diagnostic Tests Methods Group, and have provided training for Cochrane and other DTA review authors. JD, SM and YT are also authors of chapters in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. In addition, YT is an Associate Editor of the Handbook, and an editor in the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group.
Figures


References
-
- Bossuyt PMM. Chapter 4: Understanding the design of test accuracy studies. In: Deeks JJ, PMMB, Leeflang MMG, Takwoingi Y, editors. 2022.
-
- Deeks JJ, Wisniewski S, Davenport C. Chapter 4: Guide to the contents of a Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Protocol. In: Deeks JJ, Bossuyt PMM, Gatsonis C, editors. 2013.
-
- Leeflang MMG, Davenport C, Bossuyt PMM, Takwoingi Y. Chapter 6: Defining the review question. In: Deeks JJ, PMM B, Leeflang MMG, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. London: Cochrane; 2022.
-
- Macaskill P, Takwoingi Y, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C. Chapter 10: Understanding meta-analysis. In: Deeks JJ, PMM B, Leeflang MMG, Takwoingi Y, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. London: Cochrane; 2022.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources