Yu 1995a.
| Study characteristics | |||
| Patient Sampling | Cross‐sectional study, 20% random sample taken from a population over 50 years old from the Doumen county of the Guangdong province in November 1995. Data from both eyes were included in the analysis. | ||
| Patient characteristics and setting | Sample size: 200 participants, 390 eyes (72 narrow angle and 318 open angle). Age: not reported. Sex: not reported. Setting: community. Country: China. Ethnicity: Chinese. Exclusions: not reported. |
||
| Index tests | Flashlight: flashlight beam was shown from the temporal side, a cut‐off using 1/4 (grade 2) or <1/4 (grade 1) nasal iris light band ratio were used. | ||
| Target condition and reference standard(s) | Gonioscopy using Shaffer’s chamber angle grading a grade 2 was considered as occludable in the temporal quadrant (90 degrees). | ||
| Flow and timing | There were no uninterpretable test results or exclusions reported. The index test and reference standard were conducted on the same occasion. | ||
| Comparative | |||
| Notes | Conflict of interest: no conflict of interest statement provided. | ||
| 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? | Unclear | ||
| Could the selection of patients have introduced bias? | Unclear risk | ||
| Are there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question? | Low concern | ||
| DOMAIN 2: Index Test (LACD) | |||
| DOMAIN 2: Index Test (Scheimpflug photography) | |||
| DOMAIN 2: Index Test (AS‐OCT) | |||
| DOMAIN 2: Index Test (SPAC) | |||
| DOMAIN 2: Index Test (Flashlight) | |||
| Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | Unclear | ||
| If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? | No | ||
| Could the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias? | High risk | ||
| Are there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question? | Unclear | ||
| 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? | Yes | ||
| Were all patients included in the analysis? | Yes | ||
| Did all patients receive a reference standard | Yes | ||
| Could the patient flow have introduced bias? | Low risk | ||