Challenges and standards in reporting diagnostic and prognostic biomarker studies

Francisco Azuaje*, Yvan Devaux, Daniel Wagner

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The discovery of novel biomarkers is a crucial goal in translational biomedical research. A complete and accurate reporting of biomarker studies, including quantitative prediction models, is fundamental to improve research quality and facilitate their potential incorporation into clinical practice. This paper reviews key problems, guidelines, and challenges in reporting biomarker studies, with an emphasis on diagnostic and prognostic applications in cardiovascular research. Recent advances and recommendations for aiding in peer review, research quality assessment, and the reproducibility of findings, such as diagnostic biosignatures, are discussed. An examination of research recently published in the area of cardiovascular biomarkers was implemented. Such a survey, which was based on a sample of papers deposited in PubMed Central, suggests that there is a need to improve the documentation of biomarker studies in terms of information completeness and clarity, as well as the application of more rigorous quantitative evaluation techniques. There is also room for improving practices in reporting data analysis and research limitations. This survey also suggests that, in comparison with other research areas, the cardiovascular biomarker research domain may not be taking advantage of existing standards for reporting diagnostic accuracy. The review concludes with a discussion of the challenges and recommendations.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)156-161
Number of pages6
JournalClinical and Translational Science
Volume2
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009

Keywords

  • "omic" biomarkers
  • Cardiovascular disease
  • Computers
  • Diagnosis
  • Translational research

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Challenges and standards in reporting diagnostic and prognostic biomarker studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this