PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Accurate assessments of symptoms and diagnoses are essential for health research and clinical practice but face many challenges. The absence of a single error-free measure is currently addressed by assessment methods involving experts reviewing several sources of information to achieve a more accurate or best-estimate assessment. Three bodies of work spanning medicine, psychiatry, and psychology propose similar assessment methods: The Expert Panel, the Best-Estimate Diagnosis, and the Longitudinal Expert All Data (LEAD). However, the quality of such best-estimate assessments is typically very difficult to evaluate due to poor reporting of the assessment methods and when it is reported, the reporting quality varies substantially. Here we tackle this gap by developing reporting guidelines for such studies, using a four-stage approach: 1) drafting reporting standards accompanied by rationales and empirical evidence, which were further developed with a patient organization for depression, 2) incorporating expert feedback through a two-round Delphi procedure, 3) refining the guideline based on an expert consensus meeting, and 4) testing the guideline by i) having two researchers test it and ii) using it to examine the extent previously published articles report the standards. The last step also demonstrates the need for the guideline: 18 to 58% (Mean = 33%) of the standards were not reported across fifteen randomly selected studies. The LEADING guideline comprises 20 reporting standards related to four groups: The Longitudinal design; the Appropriate data; the Evaluation - experts, materials, and procedures; and the Validity group. We hope that the LEADING guideline will be useful in assisting researchers in planning, reporting, and evaluating research aiming to achieve best-estimate assessments.
摘要：
对症状和诊断的准确评估对于健康研究和临床实践至关重要，但面临许多挑战。目前，评估方法涉及专家审查几种信息来源，以实现更准确或最佳估计的评估，从而解决了缺乏单一无差错措施的问题。跨越医学的三个工作机构，精神病学,和心理学提出了类似的评估方法：专家小组，最佳估计诊断，和纵向专家所有数据(LEAD)。然而,这种最佳估计评估的质量通常很难评估，因为评估方法的报告和报告时，报告质量差异很大。在这里，我们通过为此类研究制定报告指南来解决这一差距，使用四阶段方法：1)起草报告标准，并附有理由和经验证据，这是与抑郁症患者组织进一步发展的，2)通过两轮德尔菲程序纳入专家反馈，3)在专家共识会议的基础上完善指导方针，和4）通过以下方式测试指南：i）让两名研究人员对其进行测试，ii）使用它来检查先前发表的文章报告标准的程度。最后一步还证明了对指南的需要：在15项随机选择的研究中，18％至58％（平均值=33％）的标准没有报告。LEADING指南包括与四个组相关的20个报告标准：纵向设计；适当的数据；评估-专家，材料,和程序；以及有效性组。我们希望领导指引对协助研究人员规划有用,reporting,并评估旨在实现最佳估计评估的研究。开放数据(德尔福调查1和2)，代码（分析），和材料（调查）：https://osf.io/fkv4b/。
