ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2017
Optimizing Test Utilization in the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory: Tools and Opportunities.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare providers consistently overestimate the diagnostic probability of ventilator-associated pneumonia.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2023Article
- The Need for Dedicated Microbiology Leadership in the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- Panels and Syndromic Testing in Clinical Microbiology.Clinics in laboratory medicine · 2020Review
- Practical Comparison of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel to Routine Diagnostic Methods and Potential Impact on Antimicrobial Stewardship in Adult Hospitalized Patients with Lower Respiratory Tract Infections.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optimal laboratory test utilization is important for providing high-quality clinical care and efficiently using limited health care resources. While microbiologists have long been advocates for appropriate laboratory test utilization, the widespread availability of electronic medical records capable of supporting clinician order entry and of clinical decision support tools (CDSTs) has provided expanded opportunities for implementing effective, automated test stewardship protocols. D. Nikolic et al. (J. Clin. Microbiol. 55:3350-3354, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01052-17) describe the results of implementing a CDST at their institution to curtail stool microbiology testing for patients hospitalized for more than 3 days. Their intervention significantly decreased unnecessary test orders and saved their laboratory over $8,000 in reagent and labor costs during an 11-month postintervention period. That report provides an excellent example of how clinical microbiologists can use electronic tools to optimize laboratory test utilization in their health care system.
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.