| MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES | |
| Limitations | |
| Observations |
The MBDA measures information on biologic pathways as opposed to external signs and symptoms of disease and should provide unique information that is complementary to clinical assessment. |
| 1. RELIABILITY | |
| A. Internal Consistency | Not Tested |
| Cronbach's (Describe) | |
| B. Reliability intraobserver or test-retest | Not Tested |
| Continuous scores: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) Dichotomus: Cohen kappa (Describe) |
|
| C. Reliability interobserver or Measurement error | Not Tested |
| Standard error of measurement (SEM), smallest detectable change (SDC) or Limits of agreement (LoA) (Describe) |
|
| 2. VALIDITY | |
| A. Content validity: face validity | Tested |
| Expert opinion (relevance and comprehensiveness) (Describe) |
The development of the MBDA score started with screening 396 candidate biomarkers and ended up with 12 that were combined into a score and shown to correlate well with disease activity. The test is validated for clinical use as a disease activity marker in RA. |
| B. Construct Validity: Structural validity |
Not Tested |
| Hypotheses-testing | Tested |
| Cross-cultural validity | Tested |
| Brief Description | |
| C. Criterion validity | Tested |
| Comparison with a 'gold standard' Continuous scores: correlations, ROC curves Dichotomus: Sensitivity & Specificity (Describe) |
The performance of the MBDA score compared to clinical disease activity measures was assessed in seropositive and seronegative groups. The MBDA test performed well in classifying remission/low disease activity versus moderate/high disease activity, and the correlations between the MBDA score and the DAS28‐CRP and DAS28‐ESR were relatively good. It was significantly associated with the DAS28-CRP in both seropositive (AUROC 0.77, P < 0.001) and seronegative (AUROC 0.70, P < 0.001) patients. |