Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 21;2020(7):CD009833. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009833.pub2

Rose 2014.

Study characteristics
Patient Sampling Retrospective study of consecutive patients with 1 BDG test
Patient characteristics and setting 132 patients who were seen for suspected fungal pneumonia were included. Of these, 34 had proven or probable IFI. A little more than half (55%) were male and of Caucasian race (55%). Most had either a hematologic malignancy (44%) or an allogenic stem cell transplantation (30%)
Index tests Fungitell test using 80 pg/mL as cut‐off for positivity
Target condition and reference standard(s) Mixed IFI determined by the 2008 EORTC criteria; unclear if BDG was included
Flow and timing Unclear time frame between sample and reference standard; all received index test and reference standard and were included in 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?   Unclear 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? Unclear    
Did all patients receive the same reference standard? Yes    
Were all patients included in the analysis? Yes    
Could the patient flow have introduced bias?   Low risk