Result card

  • ETH7: Are the accuracy measures decided and balanced on a transparent and acceptable way?
English
No adaptation help available for this domain

Are the accuracy measures decided and balanced on a transparent and acceptable way?

Authors: Gottfried Endel

Internal reviewers: Pseudo165 Pseudo165, Pseudo220 Pseudo220, Pseudo263 Pseudo263, Pseudo296 Pseudo296, Pseudo88 Pseudo88

The rational of the assessment is clearly described in the scoping and in the CUR domain. Both tests address the same endpoints so they have the same context and there are no differences with regard to the measurement of endpoints.

As shown in the EFF domain the study designs are quite different. But it is no systematic difference between gFOBT and FIT but the differences can be found in both groups. With FIT the additional question of cut off values arise. This may complicate implementation as well as critical appraisal or meta analysis of studies. As no modeling of the impact of the two tests was done the sensitivity of the results for a shift of the cut off value is unclear. So uncertainty is not quantified and appraisal processes can address this question.

Important
Partially
Endel G Result Card ETH7 In: Endel G Ethical analysis In: Jefferson T, Cerbo M, Vicari N [eds.]. Fecal Immunochemical Test (FIT ) versus guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FOBT) for colorectal cancer screening [Core HTA], Agenas - Agenzia nazionale per i servizi sanitari regionali; 2014. [cited 16 June 2021]. Available from: http://corehta.info/ViewCover.aspx?id=206