ArticlePloS one2011
Prediction of high-grade vesicoureteral reflux after pediatric urinary tract infection: external validation study of procalcitonin-based decision rule.
Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Atlas of Nomograms, Scoring Systems, and Predictive Tools to Guide Investigation or Management in Patients with Suspected or Confirmed Vesicoureteral Reflux: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Cases of Pediatric Pyelonephritis: A Single-Center Retrospective Study from an Extended-Spectrum β-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli Endemic Area in Japan.Yonago acta medica · 2023Article
- Imaging studies and biomarkers to detect clinically meaningful vesicoureteral reflux.Investigative and clinical urology · 2017Review
- Can procalcitonin reduce unnecessary voiding cystoureterography in children with first febrile urinary tract infection?Iranian journal of pediatrics · 2014Article
- Antibiotic prophylaxis and reflux: critical review and assessment.F1000prime reports · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPredicting vesico-ureteral reflux (VUR) ≥3 at the time of the first urinary tract infection (UTI) would make it possible to restrict cystography to high-risk children. We previously derived the following clinical decision rule for that purpose: cystography should be performed in cases with ureteral dilation and a serum procalcitonin level ≥0.17 ng/mL, or without ureteral dilatation when the serum procalcitonin level ≥0.63 ng/mL. The rule yielded a 86% sensitivity with a 46% specificity. We aimed to test its reproducibility. STUDY
designA secondary analysis of prospective series of children with a first UTI. The rule was applied, and predictive ability was calculated.
resultsThe study included 413 patients (157 boys, VUR ≥3 in 11%) from eight centers in five countries. The rule offered a 46% specificity (95% CI, 41-52), not different from the one in the derivation study. However, the sensitivity significantly decreased to 64% (95%CI, 50-76), leading to a difference of 20% (95%CI, 17-36). In all, 16 (34%) patients among the 47 with VUR ≥3 were misdiagnosed by the rule. This lack of reproducibility might result primarily from a difference between derivation and validation populations regarding inflammatory parameters (CRP, PCT); the validation set samples may have been collected earlier than for the derivation one.
conclusionsThe rule built to predict VUR ≥3 had a stable specificity (ie. 46%), but a decreased sensitivity (ie. 64%) because of the time variability of PCT measurement. Some refinement may be warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.