Table 2.

Incorporation of quality assessment in abstracts of diagnostic reviews

Approach	Overall quality of included studies	Number N = 65	Example
Quality mentioned in abstract		28 (43%) a
Quality in methods		21 (32%)	The quality of the studies was assessed using the guidelines published by the QUADAS (quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy, maximum score 14) [25].
Quality in results		12 (19%)	“The sensitivity analysis of 10 high quality studies (a score of > =4) showed a pooled sensitivity of 94% and pooled specificity of 0.95” [26]
			“The quality of the included studies was poor to mediocre” [27].
Quality results considered in conclusion		5 (8%)	α“The observed high sensitivity of the punch biopsy derived from all studies is probably the result of verification bias” [20].
			β“The quality of the studies investigating these tests is too low to provide a conclusive recommendation for the clinician” [23].

^aQuality was mentioned in one or more sections in the abstract.

α Example of conclusion in a review with a meta-analysis.

β Example of conclusion in a review without a meta-analysis.