Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19183404›Full record

ArticleClinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases2009

Near-patient assays for diagnosis of influenza virus infection in adult patients.

C Steininger, M Redlberger, W Graninger, M Kundi, T Popow-Kraupp

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guidelines for the management of adult lower respiratory tract infections--full version.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2011
    Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Signs and symptoms predicting influenza in children: a matched case-control analysis of prospectively collected clinical data.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Feasibility of diagnosing influenza within 24 hours of symptom onset in children 1-3 years of age.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2011
    Article
  11. New respiratory viruses and the elderly.The open respiratory medicine journal · 2011
    Article
  12. Article
  13. The diagnosis of viral respiratory disease in older adults.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2010
    Review
  14. Ruling out novel H1N1 influenza virus infection with direct fluorescent antigen testing.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2009
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C SteiningerDepartment of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
M Redlberger
W Graninger
M Kundi
T Popow-Kraupp
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid and reliable diagnosis of influenza is essential for identification of contagious patients and effective patient management. Near-patient assays allow establishment of the diagnosis within minutes in young children, and this study aimed to evaluate near-patient assays in relation to the patient's age. A total of 194 patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza A/H3N2 virus infection, diagnosed within a prospective cohort study, were included. Cryopreserved nasopharyngeal swabs collected from these patients were tested by four near-patient assays (Binax Now Influenza A&B, Quick S-Influ A/B, Influ-A&B Respi-Strip, and Actim Influenza A&B). The main outcome measure was sensitivity of the near-patient assays in relation to the age of patients. The Binax Now, Quick S-Influ, Influ-A&B Respi-Strip and Actim assays had overall sensitivities of 19%, 18%, 26%, and 40%, respectively. The estimated sensitivity for influenza A/H3N2 virus detection in nasopharyngeal swabs was 17-56% in children 1 year of age and decreased to 8-22% in patients 80 years of age (logistic regression). The sensitivity of the Influ-A&B Respi-Strip and Actim assays decreased significantly with increasing age (p 0.014 and p 0.033, respectively (logistic regression)), a trend for decrease was observed for the Binax Now assay (p 0.074 (logistic regression)), and the low sensitivity of the Quick S-Influ assay was similar in children and adults. Less than one-fourth of diagnosed influenza A/H3N2 virus infections can be identified in elderly patients using a near-patient assay. Consequently, near-patient assays are of limited value for confirming the diagnosis when influenza is clinically suspected in adults. Antiviral therapy and additional diagnostic procedures cannot be withheld on the basis of a negative near-patient assay result, particularly in adult patients.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolHumansInfantInfluenza A Virus, H3N2 SubtypeInfluenza, HumanMiddle AgedNasopharynxReagent Kits, DiagnosticSensitivity and SpecificityReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID19183404
PMCPMC7128506
OpenAlexW1805696929

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.