Table 3 Assessment of substantial variation and risk of bias
Domain Study | A: Substantial variation in selection of patients and GPs1 | A: Risk of bias in selection of patients and GPs1 | B: Risk of bias in data collection and patient flow1 | C: Risk of bias in diagnostic work-up2 | D: Risk of bias in prognostic work-up3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ajmi 2011 [16] | low | ? | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Albert 2011 [17] | high | high | ? | n.r. | n.r. |
BEACH | low | low | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Ben Abdelaziz 2004 [19] | low | ? | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Coenen 2004 [20] | ? | low | ? | n.r. | ? |
CONTENT | low/?* | ? | ? | high | n.r. |
French 2005 [23] | low | high | low | ? | n.r. |
GRACE | ?/high* | low | low/?* | low/?/high* | ?/high* |
Hamre 2005 [35] | ? | low | low | n.r. | low |
Harding 1980 [36] | ? | low | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Hofmans-Okkes 1993 International Study | ? | low | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Hofmans-Okkes 1993 Dutch Study | ? | ? | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Hull 1969 [38] | ? | high | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Liu 2017 [39] | low | high | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Martin 1984 [40] | high | high | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Mash 2012 [41] | high | low | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Molony 2016 [42] | low | high | ? | n.r. | n.r. |
high | high | low | high | n.r. | |
Munyati 2005 [45] | high | high | low | low | n.r. |
NAMCS | low | low/?* | low/?* | high | n.r. |
Nantha 2014 [48] | low | high | ? | ? | n.r. |
Njalsson 1992 [49] | low | low | ? | n.r. | n.r. |
Robertson 1981 [50] | low | high | low | n.r. | n.r. |
SESAM 2 | low/high* | low | low | high | n.r. |
Silva 1998 [53] | low | low | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Stefanoff 2014 [54] | ? | ? | ? | ? | n.r. |
TRANSITION | low | low | low | high | n.r. |
Verzantcoort 2018 [56] | high | low | low | n.r. | n.r. |
Wong 2016 [57] | ? | low | ? | n.r. | low/?* |
Woolnough 1985 [58] | ? | high | ? | low | n.r. |
Worrall 2008 [59] | low | high | low | high | n.r. |