Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment (QUADAS)

From: Diagnostic value of soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells in paediatric sepsis: a systematic review

  Chen
et al. 2008 [21]
Carrol
et al. 2009 [23]
Sarafidis
et al. 2010 [17]
Kevan
et al. 2011 [22]
Miedema
et al. 2011 [25]
Arzanian
et al. 2011 [24]
Schlapbach et al. 2013 [18] Mazzucchelli et al. 2013 [19] Adly
et al. 2014 [20]
Was the spectrum of patients representative of the patients who will receive the test in practice? + + +
Were selection criteria clearly described? + + + + +
Is the reference standard likely to correctly classify the target condition? + + + + + + + + +
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 two tests? + + + + + + + + +
Did the whole sample or a random selection of the sample, receive verification using a reference standard of diagnosis? + + + + ? + + +
Did patients receive the same reference standard regardless of the index test result? + + + + + + + + +
Was the reference standard independent of the index test (i.e. the index test did not form part of the reference standard)? + + + + + + + + +
Was the execution of the index test described in sufficient detail to permit replication of the test? + + + + + + + +
Was the execution of the reference standard described in sufficient detail to permit its replication? + + + + + + + +
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? + + + + + + + + +
Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index test? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Were the same clinical data available when test results were interpreted as would be available when the test is used in practice? + + + + + + + + +
Were uninterpretable/intermediate test results reported? + + + + + ? + ? ?
Were withdrawals from the study explained? + + + + + ? + ? ?
  1. “+” = low risk of bias; “−” = high risk of bias; “?” = unclear risk of bias