STARD 2015 Checklist Checker

Check your diagnostic accuracy study against the STARD 2015 reporting checklist and flow diagram before submission.

Check my manuscript, it's free

No account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX

Updated June 16, 2026

What the STARD 2015 checklist requires

STARD (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies) is the EQUATOR-endorsed reporting guideline for studies that evaluate a medical test's diagnostic accuracy. STARD 2015 has 30 items plus a participant flow diagram, covering the title and abstract, introduction, methods (index test, reference standard, participants, analysis), results, discussion, and other information. CheckMyManuscript flags missing or structurally incomplete STARD items, such as an undefined reference standard, no flow diagram, or absent estimates of accuracy, so you can fix them before submission. It checks presence and structure, not methodological adequacy.

STARD 2015 items, and what CMM checks

Each item below maps to STARD 2015. CMM flags presence and structural signals; methodological adequacy is editorial and needs human review.

Identified as diagnostic accuracy study

✓ CMM checks this

Title/abstract identify the study as evaluating diagnostic accuracy; abstract reports estimates with precision.

Flag: abstract reports sensitivity without confidence intervals.

Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Index test & reference standard

✓ CMM checks this

Both the index test and the reference standard described in enough detail to be reproduced, with rationale.

Flag: reference standard not defined, STARD cannot be met without it.

Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Participants & sampling

✓ CMM checks this

Eligibility criteria, where and how participants were identified, and whether sampling was consecutive or random.

Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Participant flow diagram & 2×2 results

✓ CMM checks this

A flow diagram, and cross-tabulation of index-test results by the reference standard.

Flag: no flow diagram, or no 2×2 table linking index test to reference standard.

Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Estimates of accuracy & registration

✓ CMM checks this

Estimates of diagnostic accuracy with precision (e.g. 95% CIs), plus registration number and protocol access.

Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

Reference-standard appropriateness

Editorial, not auto-checkable

Whether the chosen reference standard correctly classifies the target condition.

Editorial judgement, outside the scope of an automated checker.

Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026

This page reflects STARD 2015, the current version. CheckMyManuscript checks for the presence, structure, and likely-completeness signals of each item; it does not assess methodological quality and does not replace peer review. Verify the live checklist before submitting, last checked 16 June 2026.

STARD 2015 is the reporting standard for diagnostic accuracy studies. Journals expect STARD-compliant reporting and a participant flow diagram for studies that evaluate a test against a reference standard. CheckMyManuscript screens your manuscript for the presence and structure of each STARD item so preventable gaps are caught before submission.

What CheckMyManuscript checks, and what it does not

CheckMyManuscript flags structural signals: an undefined reference standard, a missing flow diagram, no 2×2 cross-tabulation, or accuracy estimates reported without confidence intervals. It does not judge whether the reference standard was appropriate, whether verification bias was present, or whether the analysis was correct. Those are methodological judgements for peer and editorial review. Use the checker as a pre-submission completeness screen, not a compliance certificate.

Also see: CONSORT checklist checker | TRIPOD checklist checker | Medical papers checker

STARD-specific checks

Identified as accuracy study

Flags if title/abstract do not identify a diagnostic accuracy study.

Reference standard

Flags if the reference standard is not described.

Flow diagram

Flags an absent participant flow diagram.

2×2 results

Flags if index-test results are not cross-tabulated against the reference standard.

Accuracy estimates

Flags accuracy estimates reported without precision (e.g. CIs).

Registration

Flags a missing registration or protocol statement.

Checks relevant to this topic

Part of our 80+ automated checks

Accuracy study identified

Title/abstract identify the study type.

Reference standard described

Reference standard defined.

Flow diagram present

STARD participant flow diagram included.

Estimates with precision

Accuracy estimates with confidence intervals.

Registration statement

Study registration stated.

The practical edge your peers already use

Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.

I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.

Ilyass, Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

Ilyass

Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.

Manon, Master's Student in Speech Therapy

Manon

Master's Student in Speech Therapy

I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.

Afonso, PhD Candidate, UFPE

Afonso

PhD Candidate, UFPE

It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.

Félix, Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

Félix

Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.

Oleg, Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Oleg

Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.

Ilyass, Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

Ilyass

Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal

I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.

Manon, Master's Student in Speech Therapy

Manon

Master's Student in Speech Therapy

I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.

Afonso, PhD Candidate, UFPE

Afonso

PhD Candidate, UFPE

It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.

Félix, Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

Félix

Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology

A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.

Oleg, Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Oleg

Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University

Frequently asked questions

Use STARD 2015, the current version. It comprises 30 items plus a participant flow diagram. Extensions exist (for example STARD for abstracts and STARD-AI for artificial-intelligence-centred diagnostic studies); use the extension that matches your study when one applies.

No. CheckMyManuscript checks the presence, structure, and likely-completeness signals of STARD items, for example, whether the reference standard is described, a flow diagram exists, and accuracy estimates include precision. It does not judge whether the reference standard was appropriate, and it does not replace peer review.

The reference standard is the best available method to establish whether the target condition is present. STARD requires it to be described in detail with a rationale, because diagnostic accuracy is measured against it. A study cannot meet STARD without clearly defining the reference standard.