Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25973210›Full record

ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2015

Narrative review of primary care point-of-care testing (POCT) and antibacterial use in respiratory tract infection (RTI).

Jonathan Cooke, Christopher Butler, Rogier Hopstaken, Matthew Scott Dryden, Cliodna McNulty, Simon Hurding, Michael Moore, David Martin Livermore

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Implementing in-vitro diagnostic point-of-care tests in community health care: how can we make this work?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Jonathan CookeDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine , The Centre for Infection Prevention and Management, Imperial College London , London , UK ; Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences , University of Manchester , Manchester , UK.
Christopher ButlerNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences , University of Oxford , Oxford , UK ; Cochrane Institute of Primary Care & Public Health, School of Medicine, Cardiff University , Cardiff , UK.
Rogier HopstakenSaltro Diagnostic Centre for Primary Care , Utrecht , T he Netherlands.
Matthew Scott DrydenDepartment of Microbiology , Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust , Winchester , UK.
Cliodna McNultyPublic Health England, Primary Care Unit, Microbiology Department , Gloucestershire Royal Hospital , Gloucester , UK.
Simon HurdingScottish Government , Clinical Lead Therapeutics Branch , Edinburgh , UK ; Medicines Management Adviser NHS Lothian , Edinburgh , UK.
Michael MoorePrimary Care and Population Sciences , University of Southampton Aldermoor Health Centre , Aldermoor Close , UK.
David Martin LivermoreNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia , Norwich , UK ; Antimicrobial Resistance & Healthcare Associated Infections Reference Unit , Public Health England , London , UK.
Cochrane · GBDrug Safety Research Unit · GBGloucestershire Royal Hospital · GBHampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBImperial College London · GBPublic Health England · GBScottish Government · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antimicrobial resistance is a global problem and is being addressed through national strategies to improve diagnostics, develop new antimicrobials and promote antimicrobial stewardship. A narrative review of the literature was undertaken to ascertain the value of C reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin, measurements to guide antibacterial prescribing in adult patients presenting to GP practices with symptoms of respiratory tract infection (RTI). Studies that were included were randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies, cohort studies and economic evaluations. Many studies demonstrated that the use of CRP tests in patients presenting with RTI symptoms reduces antibiotic prescribing by 23.3% to 36.16%. Procalcitonin is not currently available as a point-of-care testing (POCT), but has shown value for patients with RTI admitted to hospital. GPs and patients report a good acceptability for a CRP POCT and economic evaluations show cost-effectiveness of CRP POCT over existing RTI management in primary care. POCTs increase diagnostic precision for GPs in the better management of patients with RTI. CRP POCT can better target antibacterial prescribing by GPs and contribute to national antimicrobial resistance strategies. Health services need to develop ways to ensure funding is transferred in order for POCT to be implemented.

Indexed as

Bacterial InfectionPneumoniaRespiratory Infection

Identifiers

PMID25973210
PMCPMC4426285
OpenAlexW1857806697

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.