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.

QUADAS-C: A Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies / Yang, Bada; Mallett, Sue; Takwoingi, Yemisi; Davenport, Clare F; Hyde, Christopher J; Whiting, Penny F; Deeks, Jonathan J; Leeflang, Mariska M G; Bossuyt, Patrick M M; Brazzelli, Miriam G; Dinnes, Jacqueline; Gurusamy, Kurinchi S; Jones, Hayley E; Lange, Stefan; Langendam, Miranda W; Macaskill, Petra; Mcinnes, Matthew D F; Reitsma, Johannes B; Rutjes, Anne Wilhelmina Saskia; Sinclair, Alison; de Vet, Henrica C W; Virgili, Gianni; Wade, Ros; Westwood, Marie E. - In: ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE. - ISSN 1539-3704. - 174:11(2021), pp. 1592-1599. [10.7326/M21-2234]

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

Takwoingi, Yemisi;Rutjes, Anne Wilhelmina Saskia
Methodology
;
Virgili, Gianni;
2021

Abstract

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.
2021
174
11
1592
1599
QUADAS-C: A Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies / Yang, Bada; Mallett, Sue; Takwoingi, Yemisi; Davenport, Clare F; Hyde, Christopher J; Whiting, Penny F; Deeks, Jonathan J; Leeflang, Mariska M G; Bossuyt, Patrick M M; Brazzelli, Miriam G; Dinnes, Jacqueline; Gurusamy, Kurinchi S; Jones, Hayley E; Lange, Stefan; Langendam, Miranda W; Macaskill, Petra; Mcinnes, Matthew D F; Reitsma, Johannes B; Rutjes, Anne Wilhelmina Saskia; Sinclair, Alison; de Vet, Henrica C W; Virgili, Gianni; Wade, Ros; Westwood, Marie E. - In: ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE. - ISSN 1539-3704. - 174:11(2021), pp. 1592-1599. [10.7326/M21-2234]
Yang, Bada; Mallett, Sue; Takwoingi, Yemisi; Davenport, Clare F; Hyde, Christopher J; Whiting, Penny F; Deeks, Jonathan J; Leeflang, Mariska M G; Boss...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
QUADAS_C_manuscript_for_resubmission_2021.08.30.docx

Open access

Tipologia: Versione dell'autore revisionata e accettata per la pubblicazione
Dimensione 263.91 kB
Formato Microsoft Word XML
263.91 kB Microsoft Word XML Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1292472
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 17
  • Scopus 126
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 108
social impact