Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25079513›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2015

Bacteraemic and non-bacteraemic/urinary antigen-positive pneumococcal community-acquired pneumonia compared.

S P van Mens, A M M van Deursen, S C de Greeff, H E de Melker, L M Schouls, A van der Ende, M J M Bonten, E A M Sanders, B J M Vlaminckx

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

9 authors.

S P van MensDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, St. Antonius Hospital, P.O. Box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. S.van.mens@antoniusziekenhuis.nl.
A M M van DeursenLinnaeus Institute, P.O. Box 770, 2130 AT, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands.
S C de GreeffNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, P.O. Box 1, 3720 BA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
H E de MelkerNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, P.O. Box 1, 3720 BA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
L M SchoulsNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, P.O. Box 1, 3720 BA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
A van der EndeMedical Microbiology, Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, P.O. Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M J M BontenMedical Microbiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, P.O. Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
E A M SandersPaediatric Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, P.O. Box 85090, 3508 AB, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
B J M VlaminckxDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Immunology, St. Antonius Hospital, P.O. Box 2500, 3430 EM, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnosis of invasive pneumococcal pneumonia is based mainly on bacteraemia. Episodes without bacteraemia, but with a positive urinary antigen test (UAT), are considered non-invasive. We determined differences in outcome between patients with bacteraemic and non-bacteraemic/UAT-positive pneumococcal community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Adult patients with clinical and radiological evidence of CAP with blood cultures and UAT tests performed at presentation in three Dutch laboratories between June 2008 and May 2010 were included. Clinical characteristics were retrospectively extracted from hospital records. Overall, 168 patients had non-bacteraemic/UAT-positive pneumococcal CAP and 123 had bacteraemic pneumococcal CAP. The day-30 mortality was 9% and 13% for non-bacteraemic/UAT-positive and bacteraemic pneumococcal CAP patients, respectively [risk difference -4%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -11% to +3%, p = 0.28]. In a multivariable logistic regression model, age ≥ 65 years, admission to the intensive care unit/coronary care unit (ICU/CCU) and presence of an immunocompromising condition were associated with day-30 mortality. A non-significant association with mortality was found for bacteraemia [odds ratio (OR) 2.21, 95% CI 0.94-5.21, p = 0.07). No such trend was found for UAT positivity. The median lengths of hospital stay were 8 [interquartile range (IQR) 5-14] and 10 (IQR 6-18) days for non-bacteraemic/UAT-positive and bacteraemic pneumococcal CAP patients, respectively (p = 0.05). As compared to non-bacteraemic/UAT-positive pneumococcal CAP, bacteraemic pneumococcal CAP has a stronger association with day-30 mortality.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntigens, BacterialBacteremiaCommunity-Acquired InfectionsFemaleHumansMalePneumonia, PneumococcalRetrospective StudiesSurvival AnalysisYoung AdultAntigens, Bacterial

Identifiers

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.