Kolaczinski 2004.

Clinical features and settings	Presenting signs and symptoms: Suspected malaria or febrile illness Previous treatment for malaria: No exclusion criteria based on previous use of antimalarials, and no data on previous antimalarial use of the participants was presented Clinical setting: Basic health units within an Afghan refugee camp Country: Pakistan (North West Frontier Province) Malaria endemicity: Not stated Malaria endemic species: 80% P. vivax, 20%P. falciparum
Participants	Sample size: 499 Age: All age groups eligible for inclusion; actual age range of the participants not stated Sex: Both males and females eligible for inclusion; actual age range of the participants not stated Co‐morbidities and pregnancy: No exclusions based on co morbidities or pregnancy, and no data presented on the frequency of these conditions in the study population Parasite density of microscopy positive cases: Not presented
Study design	Enrolment was consecutive and prospective. 1 RDT was tested.
Target condition and reference standard(s)	Target condition: Malaria parasitaemia Reference standard: Microscopy thick and think blood films Who performed the reference standard tests, and where? Microscopists in the basic health units within an Afghan refugee camp and HNI's reference laboratory in Peshawar If microscopy was used, how many high power fields were looked at? 100 How many observers or repeats were used? 2, 1 at the BHU and 1 at the reference laboratory How were discrepancies between observers resolved? Unclear "all of the smears checked by the microscopist at each BHU were cross checked at HNI's reference laboratory at Pashawar".
Index and comparator tests	Commerical name of RDT: OptiMAL (DiaMed, AG, Cressier, Switzerland) Parasite(s) designed to detect:P. falciparum or mixed infection, non‐falciparum malaria species only Designated type: Type 4 Batch numbers: Not stated Transport and storage conditions: Not described Person(s) performing RDT: Microscopists RDT setting: Basic health units
Follow‐up	Not applicable
Notes	Source of funding: Not stated
Table of Methodological Quality
Item	Authors' judgement	Description
Representative spectrum? All tests	Yes	Participants were a consecutive series of patients attending a basic health units with suspected malaria.
Acceptable reference standard? All tests	Yes	2 microscopists, 1 working in a central laboratory, viewed at least 100 high power fields before declaring a slide negative.
Partial verification avoided? All tests	Yes	All participants who received the index test also received the reference test.
Differential verification avoided? All tests	Yes	The same reference test was used regardless of the index test results.
Incorporation avoided? All tests	Yes	The index test does not form part of the reference standard.
Reference standard results blinded? All tests	No	The index test and reference test were undertaken by the same person.
Index test results blinded? All tests	No	The index test and reference test were undertaken by the same person.
Uninterpretable results reported? All tests	Unclear	The number of participants originally enrolled in the study was clearly stated, and corresponded to the number presented in the analysis: therefore there were no exclusions due to invalid test results.
Withdrawals explained? All tests	Yes	The number of participants originally enrolled in the study was clearly stated, and corresponded to the number presented in the analysis: therefore there were no withdrawals.