Table 1.
Assessment of study quality using modified REMARK recommendationsa
Study quality question/Item | Marquardt et al., 2005 [26] | Montaner et al., 2006 [28] | Song et al., 2010 [29] | Winbeck et al., 2002 [27] | Rajeshwar et al., 2012 [21] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Was the study prospective? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
2. Was the evaluation of prognostic marker blinded to patient outcome? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Unclear | Yes |
3. Was there a defined time period during which patients were enrolled? | No | No | Yes | No | Yes |
4. Were there precisely defined clinical outcomes at the beginning of the study? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
5. Did the study provide a rational for sample size? | No | No | No | No | No |
6. Did the study provide a list of candidate variables? | N/Ab | N/Ab | N/Ab | Yes | Yes |
7. Were the methods for measuring the prognostic marker adequately described and referenced? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
8. Were patients unselected/unbiased? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Adapted from McShane et al.22 and Whiteley et al.23
Study did not use multivariate modeling.
N/A = not available.