Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 15;2021(4):CD013346. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013346.pub2

Hallager 2018.

Study characteristics
Patient Sampling Patients enrolled in DANHEP before 31 December 2012 were eligible for inclusion if they fulfilled the following criteria: (i) a positive HCV‐RNA test, (ii) a valid PIN and address recorded in the Danish Civil Registration System, (iii) ≥ 18 years of age, and (iv) cirrhosis before 31 December 2013.
Age range and % of males not reported
Patient characteristics and setting 1075 patients with CHC and cirrhosis at risk of HCC were enrolled.
Index tests AFP measurement with a cut‐off value of 20 ng/mL
Target condition and reference standard(s) SNOMED and ICD‐codes used in the definition of all inclusion criteria, outcomes and covariates are provided in the supplementary material.
Flow and timing No information on interval between index test and reference standard
Comparative  
Notes No conflicts of interest declared
Methodological quality
Item Authors' judgement Risk of bias Applicability concerns
DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection
Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? No    
Was a case‐control design avoided? Yes    
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? No    
Could the selection of patients have introduced bias?   High risk  
Are there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?     Low concern
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (AFP)
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? Yes    
Could the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias?   Unclear risk  
Are there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Low concern
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (US+AFP)
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (US)
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?     High
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? No    
Were all patients included in the analysis? Yes    
Could the patient flow have introduced bias?   High risk