Table 1 The refined scale of the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies scale (QUADAS)
From: Sirius Scheimpflug–Placido versus ultrasound pachymetry for central corneal thickness: meta-analysis
Kara [13] 2012 | Huang [9] 2013 | Jorge [12] 2013 | Maresca [15] 2014 | Bayhan [11] 2014 | Yildirim [18] 2015 | Simsek [17] 2016 | Pierro [16] 2016 | Kumar [14] 2017 | Kuddusi [19] 2017 | Mustafa [20] 2018 | Nesrin [21] 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Were selection criteria clearly described? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Is the reference standard likely to correctly classify the target condition? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Is the time period between reference standard and index test short enough to be reasonably sure that the target condition did not change between the two tests? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Did the whole sample or a random selection of the sample, receive verification using a reference standard of a diagnosis? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Did the patients receive the same reference standard regardless of the index test result? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Was the reference standard independent of the index test? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Was the execution of the index test described in sufficient detail to permit replication of the test? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Was the execution of the reference standard described in sufficient detail to permit its replication? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index test? | U | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | Y | U | Y | Y | Y |