Skip to main content
. 2022 May 16;2022(5):CD013639. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013639.pub5

Stevens 2020.

Study characteristics
Patient Sampling Study design: patients with suspected COVID‐19, all symptomatic
Patient characteristics and setting Age group: adults only
Setting: outpatient
Index tests Index test(s): chest X‐rays
Defintion for positive diagnosis on X‐ray: BSTI template
Level of training of readers: radiologist
Prevalence: 0.8
Target condition and reference standard(s) Reference standard: RT‐PCR once; twice in some
Flow and timing  
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? 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 (Chest CT)
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (Chest X‐ray)
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?   Unclear risk  
Are there concerns that the index test, its conduct, or interpretation differ from the review question?     Unclear
DOMAIN 2: Index Test (Ultrasound of the lungs)
DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard
Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? No    
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?   High 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?   Unclear risk