Sun 2020.
Study characteristics | |||
Patient Sampling | The study included 146 HCV‐infected patients; 40 patients with early‐stage HCC and 106 non‐malignant HCV‐associated chronic liver disease. Age range not reported. Males 63% |
||
Patient characteristics and setting | |||
Index tests | Serum AFP measurement: no specification. No definition of a cut‐off value | ||
Target condition and reference standard(s) | All HCC patients were on top of HCV cirrhosis and were confirmed by histological examination. Diagnosis of HCV‐related chronic liver disease was based on standard clinical, biochemical, serological, and ultrasonographic criteria, as well as the histopathological data obtained at liver biopsy. | ||
Flow and timing | No information on interval between index test and reference standard | ||
Comparative | |||
Notes | "Conflicts of interest: the authors declare that they have no competing interests." | ||
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? | No | ||
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? | Unclear | ||
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? | High | ||
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (AFP) | |||
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | Yes | ||
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? | High | ||
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (US+AFP) | |||
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | |||
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? | |||
Could the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias? | |||
Are there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question? | |||
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (US) | |||
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? | |||
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? | |||
Could the conduct or interpretation of the index test have introduced bias? | |||
Are there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question? | |||
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? | Yes | ||
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? | 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 |