Critical appraisal of human studies.

Number of patients = : Number of patients with diastolic dysfunction/HFPEF. Study aim: ++: study is focused on interpreting the relation between SNA and DD AND patient selection was clearly explained (diastolic dysfunction defined and not just distinction between LVEF 45%) AND data collection was clear. +: study is focused on interpreting the relation between SNA and DD AND patient selection was clearly explained OR data collection was clear; -: study is focused on interpreting the relation between SNA and DD OR patient selection was clearly explained OR data collection was clear; —: study is not focused on interpreting the relation between SNA and DD AND/OR patient selection was not clearly explained AND/OR data collection was not clear. Patient selection: +: Sole HFPEF or clear distinction between HFPEF and HFREF; -: no clear distinction between HFPEF and HFREF. Assessment of diastolic dysfunction: +: invasive measurement of LV diastolic filling pressures OR echocardiographic evaluation of DD according to latest ESC guidelines; +/-: echocardiographic evaluation without use of E/E’; -: confirmation of normal LVEF only. Evaluation of sympathetic activity: ++: NE-spillover locally measured; +: MSNA OR MIBG; +/-: HRV or adrenergic stimulation; -: plasma NE concentration. Clear report of findings: +: results clearly described AND critical about own research; +/-: results clearly described OR critical about own research; -: results not clearly described AND not critical about own research. Value of study: To what extent is the study relevant to answering the current question.The score displayed in the right column is the sum of scores: “+” accounts for 1 point; “+/-” for 0 points; “-” for -1 point.Critical appraisal of human studies.