Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality of studies of symptomatic subjects

From: Validity of electron beam computed tomography for coronary artery disease: asystematic review and meta-analysis

Item

Value

Budoff et al. [15]

Baumgart et al. [16]

Seese et al. [17]

Yao et al. [18]

Chen et al. [19]

Bielak et al. [20]

Hosoi et al. [21]

Budoff et al. [22]

Almeda et al. [23]

Knez et al. [24]

Patient recruitment

NR: Not reported

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

NR

1

 

1: Undergoing CAG for clinical indications

          

Exclusion criteria

NR: Not reported

NR

1

NR

NR

1

1

NR

1

NR

NR

 

1: History of CAD/revascularization

          

Outcome defined

1: No

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

 

2: Yes

          

EBCT categories

1: Quartiles or pre-selected cut-offs

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

2: Age – sex adjusted

          

Outcome measurement blinded to EBCT score

1: No

NR

2

NR

NR

2

NR

2

2

NR

2

 

2: Yes

          

Demographic characteristics

NR: Not reported

1

1

1

NR

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

1: Reported

          

Risk factors

NR : Not reported

NR

NR

NR

NR

1

1

1

NR

1

1

 

1: Reported (see Table 3)

          

Adjusted results available

1: Yes but cannot be used in meta-analysis

1

NR

NR

NR

2

3

1

2

2

NR

 

2: Yes at single cut-off and can be used in meta-analysis.

          
 

3: Yes at multiple cut-offs and can be used in meta-analysis

          

Total

Maximum: 13

6

8

5

4

11

10

9

10

7

8

Back to article page

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

Contact us