Tarupiwa 2015.
Study characteristics | |||
Patient sampling | Prospective multi‐centre study Healthcare setting: primary Point of recruitment: outpatient |
||
Patient characteristics and setting | Countries: Zimbabwe Level of typhoid endemicity (Crump 2004): medium Age: mixed Gender distribution: not stated Entry criteria: 'typical signs and symptoms of typhoid' |
||
Index tests | TUBEX On‐Site Typhoid IgG/IgM Combo |
||
Target condition and reference standard(s) | Target condition: Salmonella Typhi Reference standard(s): peripheral blood culture (3 to 5 mL) |
||
Flow and timing | Prospective multicentre study. Timing unclear. | ||
Comparative | |||
Notes | Diagnostic test accuracy data not provided in published paper but supplied separately by the corresponding authors. | ||
Methodological quality | |||
Item | Authors' judgement | Risk of bias | Applicability concerns |
DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection | |||
Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? | Yes | ||
Was a case‐control design avoided? | Yes | ||
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? | Yes | ||
Low | Low | ||
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests | |||
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | Unclear | ||
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? | Yes | ||
Low | Low | ||
DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard | |||
Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? | No | ||
Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? | Unclear | ||
Low | Low | ||
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing | |||
Was there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? | Unclear | ||
Did all patients receive the same reference standard? | Yes | ||
Were all patients included in the analysis? | No | ||
Low |
Abbreviations: PCR: polymerase chain reaction; RDT: rapid diagnostic test.