Buchheidt 2004.

Study characteristics
Patient sampling	Study design not clear. Episode‐based analysis
Patient characteristics and setting	177 participants Age ranged from 17 to 81 years Germany No further info Adults with haematological malignancies undergoing chemotherapy or bone marrow transplantation and fulfilled host factor criteria (Ascioglu 2002) Inpatients Representative spectrum? Unclear: selection process not clearly reported
Index tests	Platelia: positivity was defined as 2 or more serial samples with ODI > 1.5 times the cut‐off index and with > 0.7 times the cut‐off index. On average every 3 days samples were measured
Target condition and reference standard(s)	Invasive aspergillosis, according to EORTC criteria (Ascioglu 2002) Incorporation avoided? Not reported Acceptable reference standard? Yes: all assays were evaluated for sensitivity and specificity in the detection of IA after classification of patient episodes according to the 2002 guidelines established by the EORTC/MSG (Ascioglu 2002)
Flow and timing	Time interval: not reported Partial verification avoided? Yes: all assays were evaluated for sensitivity and specificity in the detection of IA after classification of patient episodes according to the 2002 guidelines established by the EORTC/MSG (Ascioglu 2002) Withdrawals explained? No Uninterpretable results reported? No
Comparative
No patients per category	6 proven, 3 probable, 75 possible, 93 non‐IA
Notes	Sponsoring? Funded by the German Jose Carreras Leukemia Fund
Methodological quality
Item	Authors' judgement	Risk of bias	Applicability concerns
DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection
Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled?	Unclear
Was a case‐control design avoided?	Unclear
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions?	Unclear
		Unclear	Unclear
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard?	Unclear
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified?	Yes
		Low	Low
DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard
Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition?	Yes
Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests?	Unclear
		Unclear	Low
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing
Was there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard?	Unclear
Did all patients receive the same reference standard?	Yes
Were all patients included in the analysis?	Unclear
		Unclear