Skip to main content
. 2016 Jul 4;2016(7):CD010502. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010502.pub2

Rimoin 2010d.

Study characteristics
Patient sampling See Rimoin 2010a
Patient characteristics and setting Sample size: 258
 Age (distribution): mean (SD) = 6.6 (1.9) years
GAS prevalence according to culture (with 95% confidence interval): 29.5% (95% CI not reported)
 Country of study: Latvia
 Sex (% of girls): 46.1%
 Clinical severity assessment: Centor score
 Clinical setting: walk‐in clinic
 Multi‐centre study (see Rimoin 2010a)
Index tests See Rimoin 2010a
Target condition and reference standard(s) See Rimoin 2010a
Flow and timing No follow‐up
Comparative  
Type of study Journal article
Notes See Rimoin 2010a
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? Yes    
Were patients seen in an ambulatory care setting? Yes    
    Low Low
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests
Were the RADT results interpreted with blinding of the results of culture? Unclear    
Was the type of the RADT mentioned (EIA or OIA)? Yes    
Were RADTs conducted during consultation time? No    
    Unclear 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)? Yes    
Were the culture medium, atmosphere, duration of incubation and GAS‐confirmation technique described? Yes    
    Unclear Low
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing
Was the delay between the performance of the RADT and throat culture plating less than 48 hours? Unclear    
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