Table 5.

Risk of bias in evaluated validation studies

Study	Screening test	Score for blindinga	Score for consecutivenessb	Score for representativenessc	Risk of biasd
Al-Khawaja 1996 [13]	FAST	0	0	1	High
Enderby 1987 [14]	FAST	0	0	0	High
O’Neill 1990 [15]	FAST	0	2	0	High
Flamand-Roze 2011 [21]	LAST	1	0	2	Intermediate
Choi 2015 [18]	MAST*	0	0	2	High
Kostalova 2008 [16]	MAST	0	0	2	High
Romero 2012 [17]	MAST	0	0	1	High
Doesborgh 2003 [20]	ScreeLing	2	2	2	Low
Al-Khawaja 1996 [13]	SST	0	0	1	High
Kim 2011 [22]	SVF	0	0	2	High
Thommessen 1999 [19]	UAS	1	2	1	Intermediate

^a0: assessment was not blinded or blinding was not reported on, 1: blinding for the screening test only, or blinding without further specification, 2: blinding for both the reference and the screening test

^b0: no consecutive inclusion or consecutiveness not reported, 2: consecutive inclusion of patients

^cBased on the size of the cohort, available data on stroke type, and mean age and sex of the study population, 0: not representative or not reported, 1: fairly representative or partially not reported, 2: very representative

^dTotal score ≤2: high, total score ≥3 and ≤4: intermediate, total score ≥5: low