Table 3 Quality assessment of QUADAS-2

From: Autoantibodies as diagnostic biomarkers for lung cancer: A systematic review

Reference

Study

Country

Domain 1: patient selection

Domain 2: index test(s)

Domain 3: reference standard

Domain 4: flow and timing

Score

9

Li (2017)

China

2

2

1

4

9

10

Dai (2016)

China

3

2

2

4

11

44

Chapman (2007)

Germany

3

2

2

3

10

45

Wang (2017)

USA

2

2

1

3

8

79

Dai (2017)

China

2

2

1

4

9

63

Mysikova (2016)

Czech Republic

3

1

2

3

9

80

Wang (2016)

China

3

1

1

4

9

46

Lui (2016)

USA

2

2

1

4

9

64

Yang (2015)

China

2

2

2

4

10

81

Qi (2015)

China

3

2

1

3

9

82

Lamy (2015)

France

3

1

1

3

8

54

Mattioni (2015)

Italy

2

2

1

4

9

65

Doseeva (2015)

USA

2

2

2

4

10

83

Wang (2014)

China

2

1

2

3

8

84

Ma (2013)

China

3

2

1

4

10

85

Pedchenko (2013)

USA

2

2

2

3

9

86

Dai (2013)

China

3

2

2

4

11

47

Ye (2013)

China

3

2

2

4

11

69

Zhang (2012)

China

3

2

1

4

10

87

Liu (2012)

China

3

1

2

4

10

50

Luo (2012)

China

2

2

1

4

9

55

Park (2011)

Korea

3

2

2

4

11

41

Khattar (2010)

USA

3

2

2

3

10

42

Wu (2010)

China

2

2

2

4

10

88

Yao (2010)

China

3

1

2

4

10

48

Cherneva (2010)

Bulgaria

2

1

2

4

10

68

Oji (2009)

Japan

2

1

1

4

8

49

Zhao (2018)

China

2

1

1

3

7

89

Pilyugin (2017)

Switzerland

3

1

2

3

9

90

Jung (2017)

Korea

2

2

1

4

9

66

Leidinger (2008)

Germany

2

2

2

4

10

91

Zhang (2017)

China

3

1

2

3

9

52

Wu (2018)

China

2

2

2

4

10

43

Wang (2015)

USA

3

2

2

3

10

92

Shen (2017)

China

2

2

2

4

10

93

Li (2016)

China

3

1

2

4

10

53

Costa (2014)

Netherlands

2

1

2

4

9

94

Dai (2017)

USA

3

1

1

4

9

72

Boyle (2010)

UK

2

2

2

4

10

70

Ren (2018)

China

3

2

2

4

11

95

Jia (2014)

China

3

2

1

4

10

96

Du (2018)

China

3

1

2

4

10

97

Chapman (2010)

UK

3

1

1

4

9

98

Qiu (2008)

USA

2

1

2

4

9

71

Farlow (2010)

USA

3

2

2

4

11

71

Surget (2013)

USA

3

2

2

3

10

56

Mack (2000)

Germany

2

2

2

3

9

57

Jerzy (1998)

Poland

2

2

2

3

9

58

Toshihiko (1998)

Japan

2

1

2

3

8

99

Oka (2001)

Japan

1

2

2

4

9

59

Jassem (2001)

Poland

2

2

2

3

9

60

Cioffi (2001)

Italy

2

2

2

4

10

61

Neri (2002)

Italy

2

2

2

4

10

62

Suleeporn (2003)

Thailand

1

1

2

3

7

100

Tsuji (1997)

Japan

1

2

2

3

8

101

Mitchell (1990)

USA

1

2

2

3

8

102

Dennis (2003)

USA

1

2

2

3

8

103

Zhong (2004)

USA

1

2

2

3

8

84

Zhong (2006)

USA

3

2

2

4

11

98

Ji (2008)

USA

1

2

2

4

9

105

Daniel (2008)

USA

1

2

2

3

8

51

Myrna (1997)

Germany

2

2

2

3

9

  1. Each item was assessed as “yes” or “no” or “unclear”, and the score equaled to “1”, “0”, “0”, respectively. The full score of domain 1, domain 2, domain 3 and domain 4 was 3, 2, 2, 4, respectively. The total score of four domains greater than 7 was considered
Back to article page