Did the reporting of prognostic studies of tumour markers improve since the introduction of REMARK guideline? A comparison of reporting in published articles.

ABSTRACT: Although biomarkers are perceived as highly relevant for future clinical practice, few biomarkers reach clinical utility for several reasons. Among them, poor reporting of studies is one of the major problems. To aid improvement, reporting guidelines like REMARK for tumour marker prognostic (TMP) studies were introduced several years ago. The aims of this project were to assess whether reporting quality of TMP-studies improved in comparison to a previously conducted study assessing reporting quality of TMP-studies (PRE-study) and to assess whether articles citing REMARK (citing group) are better reported, in comparison to articles not citing REMARK (not-citing group). For the POST-study, recent articles citing and not citing REMARK (53 each) were identified in selected journals through sys

SUBMITTER: Sekula P 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5470677 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature