Kawazu 2004.

Study characteristics
Patient sampling	Prospective; consecutive series of patients. Episode‐based analysis
Patient characteristics and setting	149 participants Age ranged from 17 to 74 years 70% males Japan Adults with haematological disorders that were neutropenic, underwent chemotherapy, had persistent fever despite antibiotics, acute graft versus host disease or received corticosteroids. Weekly screening of inpatients Representative spectrum? Yes: adults with haematological disorders that were neutropenic, underwent chemotherapy, had persistent fever despite antibiotics, acute graft versus host disease or received corticosteroids
Index tests	Platelia. Serum was monitored weekly. Treatment episodes with only 1 or 2 measurements were excluded. Positive is either 1 positive sample or 2 consecutive positive samples. All the rest are negative. Cut‐off 0.6 ODI
Target condition and reference standard(s)	Invasive aspergillosis, as defined by the EORTC criteria (Ascioglu 2002) Incorporation avoided? Yes: plasma GM level was not included in the microbiological criteria Acceptable reference standard? Yes: EORTC criteria (Ascioglu 2002)
Flow and timing	Not reported Partial verification avoided? All patients were classified according to the reference criteria Withdrawals explained? N/A Uninterpretable results reported? N/A
Comparative
No patients per category	9 proven, 2 probable, 13 possible, 125 no IA
Notes	ROC curves and timelines reported Sponsoring precluded? Unclear: nothing reported about support
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?	Yes
		Low	Low
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard?	No
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified?	No
		High	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?	Yes
		Low