Santangelo 2017.

Study characteristics
Patient Sampling	326 patients were included: 165 patients with AD, 34 with NPH, 43 with FTD, 22 with LBD, 19 with PSP/CBS, 11 with VaD. Sample procedure not reported. We did not include data on performance of the index test to discriminate AD participants from controls or AD participants from patients with PSP/CBS. Exclusion criteria: reported.
Patient characteristics and setting	Age at diagnosis and disease duration and education:Reported Sex: 64 males and 101 females for AD; 6 males and 5 females for VD, 26 males and 17 females for FTD, 14 males and 8 females for DLB, 23 males and 11 females for NPH Sources of recruitment: A sample who were admitted to the Memory Centre of IRCCS‐San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy between December 2008 and July 2015.
Index tests	Patients gave CSF samples. The samples were collected in polypropylene tubes and stored at ‐80°C and analysed. Abeta42 was measured using enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assays, obtained from Innogenetics NV, Gent, Belgium. Threshold: 500 pg/ml; pre‐specified, Were the index test results reported without knowledge of the reference standard? [Not reported]
Target condition and reference standard(s)	Target condition: Alzheimer's disease dementia (differential diagnosis of AD from non‐AD dementia) Reference standards: NINCDS‐ADRDA criteria for AD.
Flow and timing	The interval between established clinical diagnosis and CSF sample collection was not reported. Patients underwent lumbar puncture at the baseline visit.
Comparative
Notes
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?	No
Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions?	Yes
Could the selection of patients have introduced bias?		Low risk
Are there concerns that the included patients and setting do not match the review question?			Low concern
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
Could the reference standard, its conduct, or its interpretation have introduced bias?		Unclear risk
Are there concerns that the target condition as defined by the reference standard does not match the question?			Low concern
DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing
Was there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard?	Unclear
Were all patients included in the analysis?	No
Could the patient flow have introduced bias?		Unclear risk