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


Journal

Annals of internal medicine
ISSN: 1539-3704
Titre abrégé: Ann Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372351

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2021
Historique:
pubmed: 27 10 2021
medline: 15 12 2021
entrez: 26 10 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

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.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34698503
doi: 10.7326/M21-2234
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1592-1599

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/M014533/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/T044594/1
Pays : United Kingdom

Investigateurs

Patrick M M Bossuyt (PMM)
Miriam G Brazzelli (MG)
Clare F Davenport (CF)
Jonathan J Deeks (JJ)
Jacqueline Dinnes (J)
Kurinchi S Gurusamy (KS)
Hayley Jones (H)
Christopher J Hyde (CJ)
Stefan Lange (S)
Miranda W Langendam (MW)
Mariska M G Leeflang (MMG)
Petra Macaskill (P)
Sue Mallett (S)
Matthew D F McInnes (MDF)
Johannes B Reitsma (JB)
Anne W S Rutjes (AWS)
Alison Sinclair (A)
Yemisi Takwoingi (Y)
Henrica C W de Vet (HCW)
Gianni Virgili (G)
Ros Wade (R)
Marie E Westwood (ME)
Penny F Whiting (PF)
Bada Yang (B)

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Auteurs

Bada Yang (B)

Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (B.Y., M.M.L.).

Sue Mallett (S)

UCL Centre for Medical Imaging, University College London, London, United Kingdom (S.M.).

Yemisi Takwoingi (Y)

Test Evaluation Research Group, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, and National Institute for Health Research Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham National Health Service Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom (Y.T., C.F.D., J.J.D.).

Clare F Davenport (CF)

Test Evaluation Research Group, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, and National Institute for Health Research Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham National Health Service Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom (Y.T., C.F.D., J.J.D.).

Christopher J Hyde (CJ)

Exeter Test Group, The Institute of Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom (C.J.H.).

Penny F Whiting (PF)

Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom (P.F.W.).

Jonathan J Deeks (JJ)

Test Evaluation Research Group, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, and National Institute for Health Research Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham National Health Service Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom (Y.T., C.F.D., J.J.D.).

Mariska M G Leeflang (MMG)

Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (B.Y., M.M.L.).

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH