Scotter 2005.

Study characteristics
Patient sampling	Prospective; series of patients with same risk profile
Patient characteristics and setting	25 participants Age of cases ranged from 3 to 79 years 60% males New Zealand Children and adults undergoing stem cell transplantation or chemotherapy for haematological malignancy and had fever for > 96 hours Inpatients Representative spectrum? Yes: patients undergoing stem cell transplantation or chemotherapy for haematological malignancy and had fever for > 96 hours
Index tests	Platelia. If the patient was febrile at least once per day for 4 days or if there was a high suspicion of invasive fungal infection, samples were assayed for galactomannan testing and PCR. Number of samples per patient varied from 2 to 32. At each time point of sample/assay, the patients were classified according to their status at that moment. Negative = all samples negative; positive = at least 1 sample positive. Many different cut‐off values analysed (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 ODI)
Target condition and reference standard(s)	Invasive aspergillosis, as defined by EORTC criteria (Ascioglu 2002) Incorporation avoided? Yes: galactomannan results were excluded from EORTC criteria Acceptable reference standard? EORTC criteria (Ascioglu 2002)
Flow and timing	Time interval not reported Partial verification avoided? Yes: all patients were classified according to the reference criteria Withdrawals explained? Yes Uninterpretable results reported? No
Comparative
No patients per category	4 proven, 1 probable, 7 possible, 13 no IA
Notes	Sponsoring: work was supported by Gilead Sciences, a Bone Marrow Transplantation trust and the Canterbury District Health Board. No connections with Platelia
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?	Yes
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions?	Unclear
		Unclear	Low
DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests
Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard?	Yes
If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified?	Unclear
		Unclear	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?	Yes
		Low	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