v Method of patient selection Random, consecutive, retrospective, prospective Included patients Inclusion criteria Consecutive of random patients enrolled? Yes/no/unclear Case-control design avoided? Yes/no/unclear Inappropriate exclusion avoided? Yes/no/unclear Bias in patient selection process? High, low, unclear (bias type?) Do the included patients match the review question? High, low, unclear b. Index Test (i.e. MRI) MRI method MRI sequences used MRI interpretation Multiple radiologists? Experienced radiologists? Blinded to result of histopathology? Yes/no/unclear Pre-specified definition for adenomyosis on MRI? Yes/no/unclear Potential for bias in MRI interpretation? High, low, unclear (bias type?) Does the application of the MRI match the research question? High, low, unclear c. Reference Standard Histopathological adenomyosis definition Which cut-off/definition used? Interpretation of histopathology Multiple pathologists? Experienced pathologists? Likely to have correctly identify adenomyosis using this method? Yes/no/unclear Blinded to MRI diagnosis? Yes/no/unclear Potential for bias in histopathological diagnosis? High, low, unclear (bias type?) Does the application of the histopathological diagnosis match the research question? High/low/unclear d. Patient Flow and Timing Any patients that did not receive MRI or pathology or excluded from 2 x 2 table? Yes/no, with number and reason(s) Interval/intervention between MRI and histopathological diagnosis If specified, months/days Appropriate interval between MRI and histopathology? Yes/no/unclear All patients received (the same) histopathology diagnosis? Yes/no/unclear All patients included in analysis? Yes/no/unclear Potential for bias in patient flow? High/low/unclear For the studies investigating diagnostic accuracy 2 x 2 Tables were constructed in RevMan extracting the following information: Table 2.S2 Empty 2 x2 Tables Histopathology+ Histopathology- MRI+ n n MRI- n n
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw