Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15201195›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2004

Predicting bacterial cause in infectious conjunctivitis: cohort study on informativeness of combinations of signs and symptoms.

Remco P Rietveld, Gerben ter Riet, Patrick J E Bindels, Jacobus H Sloos, Henk C P M van Weert

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 167 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Bacterial conjunctivitis.BMJ clinical evidence · 2012
    Pooled it
  3. Acute infective conjunctivitis in primary care: who needs antibiotics? An individual patient data meta-analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2011
    Pooled it
  4. Bacterial conjunctivitis.BMJ clinical evidence · 2010
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. The treatment of acute infectious conjunctivitis with fusidic acid: a randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005
    Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Ocular Surface Infection Mediated Molecular Stress Responses: A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Remco P RietveldDivision of Clinical Methods and Public Health, Department of General Practice, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 15, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, Netherlands. r.p.rietveld@amc.uva.nl
Gerben ter Riet
Patrick J E Bindels
Jacobus H Sloos
Henk C P M van Weert
Immunologie-Zentrum Zürich · CHUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo find an efficient set of diagnostic indicators that are optimally informative in the diagnosis of a bacterial origin of acute infectious conjunctivitis.

designCohort study involving consecutive patients. Results of index tests and reference standard were collected independently from each other.

setting25 Dutch health centres.

participants184 adults presenting with a red eye and either (muco)purulent discharge or glued eyelid(s), not wearing contact lenses.

main outcome measuresProbability of a positive bacterial culture, given different combinations of index test results; area under receiver operating characteristics curve.

resultsLogistic regression analysis showed optimal diagnostic discrimination for the combination of early morning glued eye(s), itch, and a history of conjunctivitis. The first of these indicators increased the likelihood of a bacterial cause, whereas the other two decreased it. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for this combination of symptoms was 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.80). The overall prevalence of bacterial involvement of 32% could be lowered to 4% or raised to 77%, depending on the pattern of index test results.

conclusionA bacterial origin of complaints indicative of acute infectious conjunctivitis can be made much more likely or unlikely by the answers to three simple questions posed during clinical history taking (possibly by telephone). These results may have consequences for more targeted prescription of ocular antibiotics.

Indexed as

AdultAnalysis of VarianceCohort StudiesConjunctivitis, BacterialFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRegression AnalysisStreptococcal Infections

Identifiers

PMID15201195
PMCPMC487734
OpenAlexW2147536324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.