Küçük 2014.

Study characteristics
Patient sampling	Cross‐sectional study Retrospective design Sample: consecutive Direct comparison of different RADTs: no Direct comparison of several throat culture techniques: no Person performing the throat sample: not reported Exclusion if recent antibiotics use before inclusion: yes (without precision) Clinical selection of patients: explicit criteria but not a score Presenting signs and symptoms: acute sore throat, fever and acutely inflamed throat/tonsils with or without exudates Age range for inclusion: 0 to 17 years
Patient characteristics and setting	Sample size: 892 Age (distribution): mean = 5.3 years GAS prevalence according to culture (with 95% confidence interval): 24.1% (95% CI not reported) Country of study: Turkey Sex (% of girls): 42% Clinical severity assessment: none Clinical setting: mixed (paediatric emergency department and outpatient clinics) Multi‐centre study
Index tests	Throat swab: 2 different swabs Commercial name of the RADT: QuickVue In‐Line Strep A (Quidel) Type of RADT: EIA
Target condition and reference standard(s)	Throat culture medium: standard Atmosphere of incubation: not reported Duration of incubation: not reported GAS confirmation: bacitracin disk Number of plates inoculated: 1 Assessment of GAS antibody response: no Relevant details: ‐
Flow and timing	No follow‐up
Comparative
Type of study	Journal article
Notes	The authors reported using the "QuickVue Strep A (Quidel) cassette". Quidel manufactures several RADTs that use a cassette; we assumed the study evaluated the most simple one, QuickVue In‐Line Strep A kit.
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 it a cross‐sectional study or a RCT?	Yes
Were selection criteria clearly described (at least presenting signs and symptoms and age limits for inclusion)?	Yes
Was clinical selection of patients avoided?	No
Were patients seen in an ambulatory care setting?	Yes
		High	High
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests
Were the RADT results interpreted with blinding of the results of culture?	Yes
Was the type of the RADT mentioned (EIA or OIA)?	Yes
Were RADTs conducted during consultation time?	No
		High	High
DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard
Were culture results interpreted with blinding of the results of the RADT?	Unclear
Is the throat culture method likely to correctly identify GAS (laboratory culture on a blood agar plate during 48 hr)?	Unclear
Were the culture medium, atmosphere, duration of incubation and GAS‐confirmation technique described?	No
		Unclear	Unclear
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing
Was the delay between the performance of the RADT and throat culture plating less than 48 hours?	Yes
Did all patients receive a throat culture?	Yes
Did patients receive the same throat culture method?	Yes
Were undetermined/uninterpretable results reported?	No
Were withdrawals from the study explained?	Yes
		Low