Table 2 Summary of tools’ information, indices, predictive performance and quality
Tool | Tool Grade | Tool Information | Study Indices | Predictive Performance | Study Quality Indicators | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Country | Year | Citations | Studies | Citation Index | Publication Index | Literature Index | Sensitivity | Specificity | Development Method | Patient Sample Size | Number of Authors | Journal Impact | Dedicated Support | ||
PECARN [49] | A2 | USA | 2009 | 885 | 24 | 88.5 | 2.40 | 21.24 | 0.97 | 0.59 | R | 42,412 | 32 | 53.25 | Yes |
CHALICE [43] | B2 | UK | 2006 | 309 | 15 | 23.8 | 1.15 | 4.64 | 0.98 | 0.86 | R | 22,772 | 6 | 3.26 | Yes |
CATCH [51] | C1 | USA | 2006 | 319 | 12 | 24.5 | 0.92 | 3.83 | 0.98 | 0.50 | R | 3866 | 14 | 6.80 | Yes |
C1 | USA | 2005 | 124 | 6 | 8.9 | 0.43 | 0.74 | 0.99 | 0.15 | R | 1666 | 8 | 5.70 | Yes | |
Palchak [52] | C2 | USA | 2003 | 248 | 3 | 15.5 | 0.19 | 0.74 | 1.00 | 0.46 | R | 2043 | 10 | 5.35 | No |
Haydel [47] | C3 | USA | 2003 | 118 | 1 | 7.4 | 0.06 | 0.12 | 1.00 | 0.24 | R | 175 | 5 | 5.35 | No |
Atabaki [39] | C3 | USA | 2008 | 111 | 1 | 10.1 | 0.09 | 0.11 | 1.00 | 0.46 | R | 1000 | 8 | 5.73 | No |
Buchanich [40] | C3 | USA | 2007 | 4 | 1 | 0.3 | 0.08 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 0.40 | R | 97 | 1 | 1.00 | No |
Da Dalt [41] | C0 | Italy | 2006 | 85 | 1 | 6.5 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 1.00 | 0.87 | M | 3806 | 8 | 1.79 | No |
C0 | USA | 1999 | 237 | 2 | 11.9 | 0.10 | 0.47 | 0.53 | 0.72 | M | 422 | 2 | 5.70 | No | |
Klemetti [48] | C0 | Finland | 2009 | 18 | 1 | 1.8 | 0.10 | 0.02 | 0.94 | 0.29 | M | 485 | 4 | 1.07 | No |
Quayle [53] | C0 | USA | 1997 | 291 | 1 | 13.2 | 0.05 | 0.29 | 0.44 | 0.85 | M | 322 | 7 | 5.70 | No |
Dietrich [42] | C0 | USA | 1993 | 220 | 1 | 8.5 | 0.04 | 0.22 | 1.00 | 0.17 | M | 324 | 5 | 5.35 | No |
Güzel [46] | C0 | Turkey | 2009 | 17 | 1 | 1.7 | 0.10 | 0.02 | 0.69 | 0.43 | M | 916 | 6 | 1.00 | No |