ArticleAmerican journal of perinatology2015
Neutrophil CD64 as a diagnostic marker of sepsis: impact on neonatal care.
Article in American journal of perinatology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Examining the utility of the CD64 index compared with other conventional indices for early diagnosis of neonatal infection.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- [Value of combined determination of neutrophil CD64 and procalcitonin in early diagnosis of neonatal bacterial infection].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2017Article
- [Diagnostic values of plasma CD64 and sTREM-1 for pediatric pneumonia].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2016Article
- Monocyte HLA-DR expression and neutrophil CD64 expression as biomarkers of infection in critically ill neonates and infants.Pediatric research · 2015Article
- Febrile ulceronecrotic Mucha-Habermann disease following suspected hemorrhagic chickenpox infection in a 20-month-old boy.Infection · 2015Article
- nCD64 index as a prognostic biomarker for mortality in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study is to determine the validity and reliability of neutrophil CD64 in identifying infected infants and to evaluate the impact of this marker on clinical care. STUDY
designNeutrophil CD64 index was incorporated in 371 infection evaluations in 234 infants (ages 1-293 days) from 2005 to 2009 and the impact of this change on clinical care was evaluated.
resultsThe sensitivity of the neutrophil CD64 assay was 87% in identifying 31 episodes of culture positive sepsis and 83% in identifying 12 infants with ventilator-associated pneumonia. There was no difference in the mean number of antibiotic days in infants with a normal CD64 versus those with a normal complete blood count (CBC) (p = 0.89), but twofold more infants were identified as "not infected" by CD64 than by CBC.
conclusionCD64 had a high sensitivity for identifying infected infants while also decreasing the number of infants that were exposed to unnecessary antibiotic use.
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.