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

For many users of the biomedical literature, abstracts may be the only source of information about a study. Hence, abstracts should allow readers to evaluate study objectives, key design features, and main results. Several evaluations have revealed deficiencies in the reporting of journal and conference abstracts across study designs and research fields, including systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies. Incomplete reporting compromises the value of research to key stakeholders. The authors developed a 12-item checklist of preferred reporting items for journal and conference abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy studies (PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts). This article presents the checklist, examples of complete reporting, and explanations for each item of PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts. KEY MESSAGES  The PRISMA-DTA statement has become an internationally accepted reporting guideline for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies  PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts is intended to improve the completeness and informativeness of journal and conference abstracts of systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies  PRISMA-DTA for Abstracts includes 12 essential items to report in journal and conference abstracts  Here we provide the checklist, examples of complete reporting and explanations for each item of the checklist, and abstracts of two reviews that authors can use as examples for their abstracts ABBREVIATIONS DTA, Diagnostic test accuracy E&E, Explanation and Elaboration PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses PRISMA-DTA, Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies QUADAS, Quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies