3.3.2 | Index test
Four studies[33, 34, 36, 37] had a high ROB in
this area because they did not use a preset threshold for identifying
positive results. Four studies[31, 32, 35, 38] had
an unclear ROB in this area because they did not report whether they
interpreted indicator test results without knowledge of the OFC results.
Only one study had a low ROB in this area[30].
3.3.3 | Reference standard
One study[33], in which some patients did not
undergo OFC, was therefore rated as having unclear ROB in this area, and
its applicability to the research questions in this review was rated as
uncertain.
3.3.4 | Patient flow and timing
One study[35] specified a time to compare the
metrics for all patients with the interval of the reference trial based
on the same reference criteria that were included in the analysis of the
data for all patients and were therefore classified as having a low ROB
in this area; the remaining seven studies[30-32, 34,
36-38] failed to meet at least one of the criteria and were therefore
scored as having an unclear ROB. One study[33] was
rated as high ROB for flow and timing due to different reference tests
between participants, some patients in the same group received DBPCFC
while others were administered by OFC, and the other part did not
receive OFC.
Table 1 Main characteristics of included studies
3.4 | Diagnostic accuracy of CRD
3.4.1 |