Hovi 2007.

Study characteristics
Patient sampling	Prospective; consecutive series of patients. Episode‐based analysis "The study comprised all consecutive pediatric patients who were treated at the hematology/oncology unit of the Hospital for Children and Adolescents, University of Helsinki, from January 2000 to June 2002 and at increased risk for developing IFI. Eligible patients were those receiving therapy for remission induction of acute leukemia or myeloablative high‐dose chemo‐radiotherapy followed by SCT." No exclusion criteria or exclusions reported
Patient characteristics and setting	117 paediatric patients Age ranged from 1 to 16 years 57% male Finland Inpatients at the haematology/oncology department, who had an increased risk for developing IA (receiving therapy for remission induction of acute leukaemia or myeloablative high‐dose chemotherapy followed by stem cell transplantation); monitoring clinical course Representative spectrum: consecutive patients, increased risk for developing IA
Index tests	Platelia. Sera were tested once a week; antigen levels were recorded as positive, borderline or negative. Single and subsequent samples analysed. Cut‐off not reported
Target condition and reference standard(s)	Invasive aspergillosis, as defined by the EORTC criteria (Ascioglu 2002) Incorporation avoided? Not reported Acceptable reference standard? Yes, EORTC criteria (Ascioglu 2002)
Flow and timing	Time interval not reported Partial verification avoided: all patients were classified according to the reference criteria Withdrawals not reported Uninterpretable results not reported
Comparative
No patients per category	1 proven, 1 probable, 27 possible, 88 no IA
Notes	Sponsoring precluded? Nothing reported
Methodological quality
Item	Authors' judgement	Risk of bias	Applicability concerns
DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection
Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled?	Yes
Was a case‐control design avoided?	Yes
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions?	Unclear
		Low	Low
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?	Unclear
		Unclear	Unclear
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