ArticleCurrent infectious disease reports2013
Hospital admission decision for patients with community-acquired pneumonia.
Article in Current infectious disease reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Red Blood Cell Distribution Width and Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia Disease Severity.Hospital pediatrics · 2022Article
- Computerized Mortality Prediction for Community-acquired Pneumonia at 117 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2021Article
- CDS in a Learning Health Care System: Identifying Physicians' Reasons for Rejection of Best-Practice Recommendations in Pneumonia through Computerized Clinical Decision Support.Applied clinical informatics · 2019Article
- The management of community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly.European journal of internal medicine · 2014Review
- Phenotyping community-acquired pneumonia according to the presence of acute respiratory failure and severe sepsis.Respiratory research · 2014Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Where to treat patients is probably the single most important decision in the management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), with a substantial impact on both patients' outcomes and health-care costs. Several factors can contribute to the decision of the site of care for CAP patients, including physicians' experience and clinical judgment and severity scores developed to predict mortality, as well as social and health-care-related issues. The recognition, both in the community and in the emergency department, of the presence of severe sepsis and acute respiratory failure and the coexistence with unstable comorbidities other than CAP are indications for hospital admission. In all the other cases, physician's choice to admit CAP patients should be validated against at least one objective tool of risk assessment, with a clear understanding of each score's limitations.
Identifiers
23378125What 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.