Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31079313›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2019

Clinical- vs. model-based selection of patients suspected of sepsis for direct-from-blood rapid diagnostics in the emergency department: a retrospective study.

Logan Ward, Steen Andreassen, Jesper Johnsen Astrup, Zakia Rahmani, Michela Fantini, Vittorio Sambri

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, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Logan WardTreat Systems ApS, Aalborg, Denmark. lw@treatsystems.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2697-3922
Steen AndreassenTreat Systems ApS, Aalborg, Denmark.
Jesper Johnsen AstrupDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Zakia RahmaniDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
Michela FantiniUnit of Microbiology, The Greater Romagna Area Hub Laboratory, Pievesestina, Italy.
Vittorio SambriUnit of Microbiology, The Greater Romagna Area Hub Laboratory, Pievesestina, Italy.
Aalborg University · DKAzienda Unità Sanitaria Locale Della Romagna · ITNorth Atlantic Treaty Organization · BE

Funding

Innovationsfonden 5190-00011B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Selecting high-risk patients may improve the cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostics. Our objective was to assess whether model-based selection or clinical selection is better for selecting high-risk patients with a high rate of bacteremia and/or DNAemia. This study involved a model-based, retrospective selection of patients from a cohort from which clinicians selected high-risk patients for rapid direct-from-blood diagnostic testing. Patients were included if they were suspected of sepsis and had blood cultures ordered at the emergency department. Patients were selected by the model by adding those with the highest probability of bacteremia until the number of high-risk patients selected by clinicians was reached. The primary outcome was bacteremia rate. Secondary outcomes were DNAemia rate, and 30-day mortality. Data were collected for 1395 blood cultures. Following exclusion, 1142 patients were included in the analysis. In each high-risk group, 220/1142 were selected, where 55 were selected both by clinicians and the model. For the remaining 165 in each group, the model selected for a higher bacteremia rate (74/165, 44.8% vs. 45/165, 27.3%, p = 0.001), and a higher 30-day mortality (49/165, 29.7% vs. 19/165, 11.5%, p = 0.00004) than the clinically selected group. The model outperformed clinicians in selecting patients with a high rate of bacteremia. Using such a model for risk stratification may contribute towards closing the gap in cost between rapid and culture-based diagnostics.

Indexed as

Blood CulturePatient SelectionAgedAged, 80 and overBacteremiaBacteriaDNA, BacterialEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesProspective StudiesDNA, BacterialMathematical modelsRapid molecular microbiologyRisk-based stratificationSepsis

Identifiers

PMID31079313
OpenAlexW2944761563

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.