Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27716201›Full record

Trial reportBMC medicine2016

Should all acutely ill children in primary care be tested with point-of-care CRP: a cluster randomised trial.

Jan Y Verbakel, Marieke B Lemiengre, Tine De Burghgraeve, An De Sutter, Bert Aertgeerts, Bethany Shinkins, Rafael Perera, David Mant, Ann Van den Bruel, Frank Buntinx

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 36 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.4field-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.

NCT02024282 nacompletednot on this map

Validation of a Vital Signs and Symptoms Decision Tree and the Effect of a Point-of- Care CRP Test, Oxygen Saturation, a Brief Intervention and a Parent Leaflet on Diagnosing, Antibiotic Prescribing Rate and Parental Satisfaction in Acutely Ill Children in Primary Care."

TypeinterventionalSponsorKU LeuvenRan2013 to 2014Enrolled8,962ConditionsSepsis, Bacteraemia, Meningitis, AbscessArmsUse of C-reactive protein (CRP) point of care test, Brief intervention and parent leaflet, Finger Pulse Oximeter
NCT04470518 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Impact of a Diagnostic Algorithm on Antibiotic Prescribing Rate and Further Management of Acutely Ill Children Presenting to Ambulatory Care: Multicentre, Cluster-randomized, Parallel Group Pragmatic Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorKU LeuvenRan2021 to 2024Enrolled6,750ConditionsInfectionArmsdiagnostic algorithm
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Causes of fever in primary care in Southeast Asia and the performance of C-reactive protein in discriminating bacterial from viral pathogens.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2020
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Reducing inappropriate antibiotic prescribing for children in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial of two interventions.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Jan Y VerbakelNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK. jan.verbakel@phc.ox.ac.uk.
Marieke B LemiengreDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, Gent, 9000, Belgium.
Tine De BurghgraeveDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
An De SutterDepartment of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, Gent, 9000, Belgium.
Bert AertgeertsDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Bethany ShinkinsLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS29LJ, UK.
Rafael PereraNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
David MantNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Ann Van den BruelNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Frank BuntinxDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33J, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
University of Oxford · GBKU Leuven · BEGhent University · BEUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoint-of-care blood C-reactive protein (CRP) testing has diagnostic value in helping clinicians rule out the possibility of serious infection. We investigated whether it should be offered to all acutely ill children in primary care or restricted to those identified as at risk on clinical assessment.

methodsCluster randomised controlled trial involving acutely ill children presenting to 133 general practitioners (GPs) at 78 GP practices in Belgium. Practices were randomised to undertake point-of-care CRP testing in all children (1730 episodes) or restricted to children identified as at clinical risk (1417 episodes). Clinical risk was assessed by a validated clinical decision rule (presence of one of breathlessness, temperature ≥ 40 °C, diarrhoea and age 12-30 months, or clinician concern). The main trial outcome was hospital admission with serious infection within 5 days. No specific guidance was given to GPs on interpreting CRP levels but diagnostic performance is reported at 5, 20, 80 and 200 mg/L.

resultsRestricting CRP testing to those identified as at clinical risk substantially reduced the number of children tested by 79.9 % (95 % CI, 77.8-82.0 %). There was no significant difference between arms in the number of children with serious infection who were referred to hospital immediately (0.16 % vs. 0.14 %, P = 0.88). Only one child with a CRP < 5 mg/L had an illness requiring admission (a child with viral gastroenteritis admitted for rehydration). However, of the 80 children referred to hospital to rule out serious infection, 24 (30.7 %, 95 % CI, 19.6-45.6 %) had a CRP < 5 mg/L.

conclusionsCRP testing should be restricted to children at higher risk after clinical assessment. A CRP < 5 mg/L rules out serious infection and could be used by GPs to avoid unnecessary hospital referrals.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02024282 (registered on 14

Indexed as

Point-of-Care TestingBelgiumChildChild, PreschoolC-Reactive ProteinFemaleHumansInfantInfectionsMalePrimary Health CareC-Reactive ProteinChildC-reactive proteinPoint-of-carePrimary careSerious infection

Identifiers

PMID27716201
PMCPMC5052874
OpenAlexW2529180733

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.