QUADAS-C: A Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies

诊断准确性 医学 致盲 考试(生物学) 德尔菲法 医学物理学 统计 计算机科学 人工智能 临床试验 放射科 病理 数学 生物 古生物学
作者
Bada Yang,Susan Mallett,Yemisi Takwoingi,Clare Davenport,Christopher Hyde,Penny Whiting,Jonathan J Deeks,Mariska Leeflang,the QUADAS-C Group†
出处
期刊:Annals of Internal Medicine [American College of Physicians]
卷期号:174 (11): 1592-1599 被引量:301
标识
DOI:10.7326/m21-2234
摘要

Comparative diagnostic test accuracy studies assess and compare the accuracy of 2 or more tests in the same study. Although these studies have the potential to yield reliable evidence regarding comparative accuracy, shortcomings in the design, conduct, and analysis may bias their results. The currently recommended quality assessment tool for diagnostic test accuracy studies, QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2), is not designed for the assessment of test comparisons. The QUADAS-C (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-Comparative) tool was developed as an extension of QUADAS-2 to assess the risk of bias in comparative diagnostic test accuracy studies. Through a 4-round Delphi study involving 24 international experts in test evaluation and a face-to-face consensus meeting, an initial version of the tool was developed that was revised and finalized following a pilot study among potential users. The QUADAS-C tool retains the same 4-domain structure of QUADAS-2 (Patient Selection, Index Test, Reference Standard, and Flow and Timing) and comprises additional questions to each QUADAS-2 domain. A risk-of-bias judgment for comparative accuracy requires a risk-of-bias judgment for the accuracy of each test (resulting from QUADAS-2) and additional criteria specific to test comparisons. Examples of such additional criteria include whether participants either received all index tests or were randomly assigned to index tests, and whether index tests were interpreted with blinding to the results of other index tests. The QUADAS-C tool will be useful for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy addressing comparative questions. Furthermore, researchers may use this tool to identify and avoid risk of bias when designing a comparative diagnostic test accuracy study.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
海绵宝宝完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
keyantong完成签到 ,获得积分10
1秒前
1秒前
1秒前
QL完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
2秒前
ylin发布了新的文献求助10
2秒前
2秒前
qbhkai发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
CipherSage应助sunny30采纳,获得30
5秒前
5秒前
长得谦虚发布了新的文献求助10
5秒前
8R60d8应助朴素凝冬采纳,获得10
6秒前
白蓝鸟完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
SciGPT应助无敌暴龙学神采纳,获得10
7秒前
陈凯鸿发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
困了发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
深情的白柏完成签到 ,获得积分20
7秒前
沉默是金发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
7秒前
8秒前
牧青发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
科研通AI6.4应助111采纳,获得10
8秒前
南庭完成签到,获得积分0
8秒前
科研通AI6.4应助senfy007采纳,获得10
9秒前
充电宝应助HKK采纳,获得10
9秒前
内向忆南完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
dolla完成签到 ,获得积分10
10秒前
10秒前
烟花应助感动羊采纳,获得10
11秒前
11秒前
12秒前
华仔应助陈凯鸿采纳,获得10
12秒前
13秒前
13秒前
wyk完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
14秒前
arsinagarcc完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
14秒前
SciGPT应助xun采纳,获得10
14秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Rosenblum, Global Change Biology 800
Essentials of Carbohydrate Chemistry and Biochemistry, 4th Edition 800
Organizational Behavior 510
Management and the Arts 510
Matrix Methods in Data Mining and Pattern Recognition Second Edition 510
Physiologic specialization in Peronospora manshurica 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 工程类 有机化学 物理 复合材料 生物化学 内科学 细胞生物学 基因 遗传学 免疫学 冶金 光电子学 癌症研究
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7777088
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 9318254
关于积分的说明 20363169
捐赠科研通 7364154
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3318840
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2466494
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2334061