Table 7.

Quality appraisal of studies that reported diagnostic test characteristics of novel methods for Echinococcus multilocularis surveillance in people, canids, or the environment at the population level (2008–2018).

Title	Author, year	Risk of bias				Applicability concerns
		Patient selection	Index test	Reference standard	Flow and timing	Patient selection	Index test	Reference standard
Dot immunogold filtration assay (DIGFA) with multiple native antigens for rapid serodiagnosis of human cystic and alveolar echinococcosis	Feng et al. 2010	●	●	○	○	○	○	○
Field evaluation of an immunochromatographic test for diagnosis of cystic and alveoloar Echinococcus	Gao et al. 2018	○	○	○	○	○	○	○
Dogs as victims of their own worms: serodiagnosis of canine alveolar echinococcosis	Frey et al. 2017	●	●	○	●	●	●	○
A semi-automated magnetic capture probe based DNA extraction and real-time PCR method applied in the Swedish surveillance of Echinococcus multilocularis in red fox (Vulpes vulpes) fecal samples	Isaksson et al. 2014	●	●	●	●	○	○	○
Specific detection of Echinococcus spp. from the Tibetan fox (Vulpes ferrilata) and the red fox (V. vulpes) using copro-DNA PCR analysis	Jiang et al. 2012	○	●	●	●	○	○	○
Latent class models for Echinococcus multilocularis diagnosis in foxes in Switzerland in the absence of a gold standard	Otero-Abad et al. 2017	●	●	○	○	○	○	○
Segmental Sedimentation and Counting Technique (SSCT): An adaptable method for qualitative diagnosis of Echinococcus multilocularis in fox intestines	Umhang et al. 2011	●	Δ	●	●	○	○	○
Canine echinococcosis in Kyrgyzstan: Using prevalence data adjusted for measurement error to develop transmission dynamics models	Ziadinov et al. 2008	○	●	○	○	○	○	○
Comparison of different commercial DNA extraction kits and PCR protocols for the detection of Echinococcus multilocularis eggs in fecal samples from foxes	Maksimov et al. 2017	●	●	○	Δ	●	○	○

● Not consistent with criteria, high risk of bias; ○ Consistent with criteria, low risk of bias; Δ Unknown risk of bias.