Skip to main content

Table 2 Risk of bias in included studies for the systematic review on detection of HBV-DNA and update of the systematic review on detection of HCV-RNA from DBS samples compared to venous blood sampling (plasma/serum)

From: Diagnostic accuracy of detection and quantification of HBV-DNA and HCV-RNA using dried blood spot (DBS) samples – a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Patient selection

Bias

Index test

Bias

Reference standard

Bias

Flow and timing

Bias

 

Was a case control design avoided

Consecutive or random sample of patients

Inappropriate exclusions

Blinded to reference standard?

Could the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?

Are laboratory personelle blinded to index test?

Could the reference standard have introduced bias?

Is there an appropriate interval between the index test and reference standard?

All patients receive the same reference standard?

All patients recruited into the study are included in the analysis?

HBV-DNA

Alidjinou

NR, but no case control design

UR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

NR

UR

Alhusseini

Case control design, sampling NR

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

NR

UR

Durgadevi

Case control design

HR

NR

UR

NR

UR

NR

UR

Gupta

Selection of only known HBV carriers,

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Partly reported

LR

Gruner

NR

UR

Not blinded, NR

UR

NR

UR

NR

UR

Jardi R

selection only of cases

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Partly reported

LR

Lira R

Selection of only cases

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

NR

UR

Mohamed S

Case control design

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

NR

UR

Mossner

Sampling from high-risk and low risk groups

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Sampling reported, same reference standard, all patients included in analysis

LR

Ross

No case control design, sampling NR

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Flow reported

LR

Stene- Johannsen

Sampling from high-risk

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Sampling reported, same reference standard, all patients included in analysis

LR

Vinikoor

No case control design, only cases

HR

Not blinded interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Flow reported

LR

HCV-RNA

Dokubo

No case control, concurrent sampling from a prospective cohort

LR

NR

UR

NR

UR

Sampling reported, same reference standard, all patients recruited included in analysis

LR

Gruner

NR

UR

Not blinded, NR

UR

NR

UR

NR

UR

Marins

Only cases

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

NR, same reference standard, NR

UR

Marques

NR

UR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

NR, same reference standard, NR

UR

Mossner

Sampling from high-risk and low risk groups

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Sampling reported, same reference standard, all patients included in analysis

LR

Soulier

Sampling from high-risk and low risk-groups

HR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

Not blinded, interpretation unbiased

LR

NR, same reference standard, NR

LR

  1. HR High risk of bias, LR Low risk of bias, UR Unclear risk of bias, NR Not reported