文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

QUADAS-C:用于评估诊断准确性比较研究偏倚风险的工具。

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

机构信息

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

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

出版信息

Ann Intern Med. 2021 Nov;174(11):1592-1599. doi: 10.7326/M21-2234. Epub 2021 Oct 26.


DOI:10.7326/M21-2234
PMID:34698503
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.

摘要

比较诊断测试准确性研究评估和比较了两项或多项在同一项研究中的测试的准确性。尽管这些研究有可能产生关于比较准确性的可靠证据,但设计、进行和分析方面的缺陷可能会使研究结果产生偏差。目前推荐的诊断测试准确性研究质量评估工具 QUADAS-2(诊断准确性研究的质量评估-2)并不是为评估测试比较而设计的。QUADAS-C(诊断准确性研究的质量评估-比较)工具是 QUADAS-2 的扩展,用于评估比较诊断测试准确性研究中的偏倚风险。通过涉及 24 名测试评估国际专家的四轮德尔菲研究和一次面对面共识会议,开发了工具的初始版本,并在潜在用户中进行了试点研究后进行了修订和最终确定。QUADAS-C 工具保留了 QUADAS-2 的相同的 4 个领域结构(患者选择、索引测试、参考标准和流程和时间),并包含每个 QUADAS-2 领域的附加问题。比较准确性的偏倚风险判断需要对每个测试(源自 QUADAS-2)的准确性进行偏倚风险判断,以及针对测试比较的其他特定标准。此类附加标准的示例包括参与者是否接受了所有索引测试或是否随机分配到索引测试,以及索引测试是否在对其他索引测试结果进行盲法的情况下进行解释。QUADAS-C 工具将有助于系统地审查解决比较问题的诊断测试准确性。此外,研究人员在设计比较诊断测试准确性研究时可以使用此工具来识别和避免偏倚风险。

相似文献

[1]
QUADAS-C: A Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.

Ann Intern Med. 2021-11

[2]
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1

[3]
Quality assessment of comparative diagnostic accuracy studies: our experience using a modified version of the QUADAS-2 tool.

Res Synth Methods. 2013-6-10

[4]
Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Using AI (QUADAS-AI): Protocol for a Qualitative Study.

JMIR Res Protoc. 2024-9-18

[5]
QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Ann Intern Med. 2011-10-18

[6]
[QUADAS-C-A tool for assessing risk of bias regarding Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-Comparative].

Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2022-6-10

[7]
[Risk on bias assessment: (6) A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment on Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2)].

Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2018-4-10

[8]
The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003-11-10

[9]
Development and validation of methods for assessing the quality of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Health Technol Assess. 2004-6

[10]
Interrater reliability in assessing quality of diagnostic accuracy studies using the QUADAS tool. A preliminary assessment.

Acad Radiol. 2006-7

引用本文的文献

[1]
Comparison of the Serodiagnostic Accuracy Tests for Lyme Disease in Adults and Children: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Pathogens. 2025-8-6

[2]
Evaluation of imaging techniques for early detection of intrathoracic cancers in symptomatic patients in primary care: a systematic review.

BMJ Open. 2025-8-16

[3]
Performance Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Techniques in the Diagnosis of Brain Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Cureus. 2025-7-28

[4]
How useful is contrast-enhanced ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis? A systematic review with meta-analysis on the comparison between contrast-enhanced ultrasound and colour or power Doppler ultrasound.

Radiol Med. 2025-8

[5]
Is remotely supervised ultrasound (tele-ultrasound) inferior to the traditional service model of ultrasound with an in-person imaging specialist? A systematic review.

Ultrasound J. 2025-7-28

[6]
Artificial intelligence in the interpretation of upper extremity trauma radiographs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

JSES Rev Rep Tech. 2025-3-8

[7]
Autobiographical memory in Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review.

Front Neurol. 2025-6-16

[8]
Epileptic Seizure Detection Using Machine Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Brain Sci. 2025-6-12

[9]
Low-complexity manual nucleic acid amplification tests for pulmonary tuberculosis in children.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-6-25

[10]
Effectiveness and safety of AI-driven closed-loop systems in diabetes management: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2025-6-23

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索