QUADAS ITEM | Cooperstein, 2009 [47] | Teoh, 2009 [4] | Arzola, 2011 [1] | Kim, 2012 [3] |
---|---|---|---|---|
Abbreviations: Y = yes, N = no, U = unclear | ||||
1. Was the spectrum of patients representative of the patients who will receive the test in practice? | N | Y | N | Y |
2. Were selection criteria clearly described? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
3. Is the reference standard likely to correctly classify the target condition? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
4. Is the time period between reference standard and index test short enough to be reasonably sure that the target condition did not change between the 2 tests? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
5. Did the whole sample or a random selection of the sample receive verification using a reference standard of diagnosis? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
6. Did patients receive the same reference standard regardless of the index text result? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
7. Was the reference standard independent of the index test (ie, the index test did not form part of the reference standard)? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
8. Was the execution of the index test described in sufficient detail to permit replication of the test? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
9. Was the execution of the reference standard described in sufficient detail to permit its replication? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
10. Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | N | Y | Y | Y |
11. Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index test? | N | Y | N | Y |
12. Were the same clinical data available when test results were interpreted as would be available when the test is used in practice? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
13. Were interpretable/intermediate test results reported? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
14. Were withdrawals from the study explained? | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Total quality score | 11 | 14 | 12 | 14 |