U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Screening of Shiga-toxigenic Escherichia coli in Clinical Fecal Samples: A Review of Diagnostic Accuracy, Clinical Utility, Cost-Effectiveness and Guidelines [Internet]. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2015 Jul 8.

Cover of Screening of Shiga-toxigenic Escherichia coli in Clinical Fecal Samples: A Review of Diagnostic Accuracy, Clinical Utility, Cost-Effectiveness and Guidelines

Screening of Shiga-toxigenic Escherichia coli in Clinical Fecal Samples: A Review of Diagnostic Accuracy, Clinical Utility, Cost-Effectiveness and Guidelines [Internet].

Show details

METHODS

Literature Search Strategy

A limited literature search was conducted on key resources including PubMed, The Cochrane Library, University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases, ECRI, Canadian and major international health technology agencies, as well as a focused Internet search. No filters were applied to limit the retrieval by study type. Where possible, retrieval was limited to the human population. The search was also limited to English language documents published between January 1, 2005 and June 2, 2015.

Selection Criteria and Methods

One reviewer screened citations and selected studies. In the first level of screening, titles and abstracts were reviewed and potentially relevant articles were retrieved and assessed for inclusion. The final selection of full-text articles was based on the inclusion criteria presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Selection Criteria.

Table 1

Selection Criteria.

Exclusion Criteria

Studies were excluded if they did not satisfy the selection criteria, if they were duplicate publications, or were published prior to 2005. Studies reporting sensitivity of a particular method by confirming only the positive test results with another method were excluded. Studies already included in an included health technology assessment or systematic review, were excluded. Studies on the identification of multiple organisms that did not report results separately for STEC were excluded.

Critical Appraisal of Individual Studies

Critical appraisal of a study was conducted based on an assessment tool appropriate for the particular study design. The AMSTAR checklist12 was used for systematic reviews; the QUADAS 2 tool13 for diagnostic studies; the British Medical Journal checklist14 for economic studies and the AGREE II tool15 for evidence-based guidelines.

For the critical appraisal, a numeric score was not calculated. Instead, the strength and limitations of the study were described narratively.

Copyright © 2015 Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.

Copyright: This report contains CADTH copyright material and may contain material in which a third party owns copyright. This report may be used for the purposes of research or private study only. It may not be copied, posted on a web site, redistributed by email or stored on an electronic system without the prior written permission of CADTH or applicable copyright owner.

Links: This report may contain links to other information available on the websites of third parties on the Internet. CADTH does not have control over the content of such sites. Use of third party sites is governed by the owners’ own terms and conditions.

Except where otherwise noted, this work is distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-ND), a copy of which is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Bookshelf ID: NBK311011

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (1.0M)

Other titles in this collection

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...