Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28609435›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2017

Predicting Infectious ComplicatioNs in Children with Cancer: an external validation study.

Gabrielle M Haeusler, Karin A Thursky, Francoise Mechinaud, Franz E Babl, Richard De Abreu Lourenco, Monica A Slavin, Robert Phillips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Home-based care of low-risk febrile neutropenia in children-an implementation study in a tertiary paediatric hospital.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Febrile neutropenia in paediatric oncology.Paediatrics and child health · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Emergency Department Chief Complaints Among Children With Cancer.Journal of pediatric hematology/oncology · 2018
    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

7 authors.

Gabrielle M HaeuslerThe Paediatric Integrated Cancer Service, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
Karin A ThurskyDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia.
Francoise MechinaudChildren's Cancer Centre, Royal Children's Hospital, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
Franz E BablDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Royal Children's Hospital, 50 Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia.
Richard De Abreu LourencoCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, 15 Broadway, Ultimo, New South Wales 2007, Australia.
Monica A SlavinDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia.
Robert PhillipsCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK.

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2014-07-072Medical Research Council G0800472
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to validate the 'Predicting Infectious ComplicatioNs in Children with Cancer' (PICNICC) clinical decision rule (CDR) that predicts microbiologically documented infection (MDI) in children with cancer and fever and neutropenia (FN). We also investigated costs associated with current FN management strategies in Australia.

methodsDemographic, episode, outcome and cost data were retrospectively collected on 650 episodes of FN. We assessed the discrimination, calibration, sensitivity and specificity of the PICNICC CDR in our cohort compared with the derivation data set.

resultsUsing the original variable coefficients, the CDR performed poorly. After recalibration the PICNICC CDR had an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve of 0.638 (95% CI 0.590-0.685) and calibration slope of 0.24. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of the PICNICC CDR at presentation was 78.4%, 39.8%, 28.6% and 85.7%, respectively. For bacteraemia, the sensitivity improved to 85.2% and AUC-ROC to 0.71. Application at day 2, taking into consideration the proportion of MDI known (43%), further improved the sensitivity to 87.7%. Length of stay is the main contributor to cost of FN treatment, with an average cost per day of AUD 2183 in the low-risk group.

conclusionsFor prediction of any MDI, the PICNICC rule did not perform as well at presentation in our cohort as compared with the derivation study. However, for bacteraemia, the predictive ability was similar to that of the derivation study, highlighting the importance of recalibration using local data. Performance also improved after an overnight period of observation. Implementation of a low-risk pathway, using the PICNICC CDR after a short period of inpatient observation, is likely to be safe and has the potential to reduce health-care expenditure.

Indexed as

AdolescentAustraliaChildChild, PreschoolDecision Support TechniquesFemaleFeverHumansInfectionsLength of StayMaleNeoplasmsNeutropeniaRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID28609435
PMCPMC5520507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.