Hancock 2009.
Study characteristics | |||
Patient Sampling | Consecutive new patient referrals to memory clinic attending with an informant | ||
Patient characteristics and setting | Memory clinics in a psychiatric hospital and cognitive function clinic based in a regional neuroscience centre in the UK, n = 144 | ||
Index tests | IQCODE 16 item, English language | ||
Target condition and reference standard(s) | Clinical dementia diagnosis using DSM‐IV | ||
Flow and timing | 144 included, no figures to quote how many ineligible over study period Index test performed independently from clinical assessment and not used to assess reference standard. Both tests performed on same day |
||
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 | ||
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 | ||
Were all patients included in the analysis? | Yes | ||
Could the patient flow have introduced bias? | Low risk |