Study characteristics |
Patient Sampling |
Retrospective study of patients for whom serum BDG was collected twice weekly |
Patient characteristics and setting |
Adult hematology or hematopoietic allogenic stem cell transplantation patients with 2 consecutive BDG tests. Thirteen patients had proven or probable IFI. The median age was 53 years (range 17 to 79 years), and 61% were male |
Index tests |
Glucatell test using 80 pg/mL as cut‐off for positivity |
Target condition and reference standard(s) |
Mixed IFI determined by the 2008 EORTC criteria with BDG excluded |
Flow and timing |
BDG test was done with 1 week of reference standard. All received index test and reference standard; however, possible IFI cases were excluded from the analysis |
Comparative |
|
Notes |
|
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 |
|
|
Could the selection of patients have introduced bias? |
|
Low risk |
|
Are there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question? |
|
|
Low concern |
DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard |
Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? |
Yes |
|
|
Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? |
Unclear |
|
|
Could the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias? |
|
Low risk |
|
Are there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question? |
|
|
Low concern |
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing |
Was there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? |
Yes |
|
|
Did all patients receive the same reference standard? |
Yes |
|
|
Were all patients included in the analysis? |
No |
|
|
Could the patient flow have introduced bias? |
|
High risk |
|