The development of QUADAS: A tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews

被引:2924
作者
Penny Whiting
Anne WS Rutjes
Johannes B Reitsma
Patrick MM Bossuyt
Jos Kleijnen
机构
[1] Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York
[2] Dept. Clin. Epidemiol./Biostatist., Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam
关键词
Panel Member; Index Test; Quality Assessment Tool; Diagnostic Accuracy Study; Delphi Round;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2288-3-25
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: In the era of evidence based medicine, with systematic reviews as its cornerstone, adequate quality assessment tools should be available. There is currently a lack of a systematically developed and evaluated tool for the assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. The aim of this project was to combine empirical evidence and expert opinion in a formal consensus method to develop a tool to be used in systematic reviews to assess the quality of primary studies of diagnostic accuracy. Methods: We conducted a Delphi procedure to develop the quality assessment tool by refining an initial list of items. Members of the Delphi panel were experts in the area of diagnostic research. The results of three previously conducted reviews of the diagnostic literature were used to generate a list of potential items for inclusion in the tool and to provide an evidence base upon which to develop the tool. Results: A total of nine experts in the field of diagnostics took part in the Delphi procedure. The Delphi procedure consisted of four rounds, after which agreement was reached on the items to be included in the tool which we have called QUADAS. The initial list of 28 items was reduced to fourteen items in the final tool. Items included covered patient spectrum, reference standard, disease progression bias, verification bias, review bias, clinical review bias, incorporation bias, test execution, study withdrawals, and indeterminate results. The QUADAS tool is presented together with guidelines for scoring each of the items included in the tool. Conclusions: This project has produced an evidence based quality assessment tool to be used in systematic reviews of diagnostic accuracy studies. Further work to determine the usability and validity of the tool continues.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 13
页数:12
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
Glasziou P., Irwig L., Bain C., Colditz G., Systematic Reviews in Health Care: A Practical Guide, (2001)
[2]  
Deeks J., Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests, Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context, (2001)
[3]  
Whiting P., Rutjes A., Dinnes J., Reitsma J.B., Bossuyt P., Kleijnen J., A Systematic Review of Existing Quality Assessment Tools Used to Assess the Quality of Diagnostic Research
[4]  
Streiner D.L., Norman G.R., Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use, (1995)
[5]  
Jadad A.R., Moore A., Carroll D., Jenkinson C., Reynolds D.J., Gavaghan D.J., McQuay H.J., Assessing the quality of reports of randomised clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?, Control Clin Trials, 17, pp. 1-12, (1996)
[6]  
Juni P., Altman D.G., Egger M., Assessing the quality of controlled trials, BMJ, 323, pp. 42-46, (2001)
[7]  
Juni P., Witschi A., Bloch R.M., Egger M., The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis, JAMA, 282, pp. 1054-1060, (1999)
[8]  
Greenland S., Invited Commentary: A critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods, A J Epidemiol, 140, pp. 290-296, (1994)
[9]  
Whiting P., Dinnes J., Rutjes A.W.S., Reitsma J.B., Kleijnen J., A Systematic Review of How Quality Assessment Has Been Handled in Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Tests
[10]  
Whiting P., Rutjes A.W.S., Dinnes J., Reitsma J.B., Bossuyt P.M.M., Kleijnen J., The development and validation of methods for assessing the quality and reporting of diagnostic studies, Health Technol Assess