Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31258921›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open respiratory research2019

Early identification of severe community-acquired pneumonia: a retrospective observational study.

Frances S Grudzinska, Kerrie Aldridge, Sian Hughes, Peter Nightingale, Dhruv Parekh, Mansoor Bangash, Rachel Dancer, Jaimin Patel, Elizabeth Sapey, David R Thickett and 1 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open respiratory research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

11 authors.

Frances S GrudzinskaInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0952-0163
Kerrie AldridgeInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK.
Sian HughesQueen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Peter NightingaleQueen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Dhruv ParekhInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Mansoor BangashQueen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Rachel DancerInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jaimin PatelInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK.
Elizabeth SapeyInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK.
David R ThickettInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK.
Davinder P DosanjhInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham College of Medical and Dental Sciences, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L008335/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a leading cause of sepsis worldwide. Prompt identification of those at high risk of adverse outcomes improves survival by enabling early escalation of care. There are multiple severity assessment tools recommended for risk stratification; however, there is no consensus as to which tool should be used for those with CAP. We sought to assess whether pneumonia-specific, generic sepsis or early warning scores were most accurate at predicting adverse outcomes. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of all cases of CAP admitted to a large, adult tertiary hospital in the UK between October 2014 and January 2016. All cases of CAP were eligible for inclusion and were reviewed by a senior respiratory physician to confirm the diagnosis. The association between the CURB65, Lac-CURB-65, quick Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment tool (qSOFA) score and National Early Warning Score (NEWS) at the time of admission and outcome measures including intensive care admission, length of hospital stay, in-hospital, 30-day, 90-day and 365-day all-cause mortality was assessed. Results: 1545 cases were included with 30-day mortality of 19%. Increasing score was significantly associated with increased risk of poor outcomes for all four tools. Overall accuracy assessed by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was significantly greater for the CURB65 and Lac-CURB-65 scores than qSOFA. At admission, a CURB65 ≥2, Lac-CURB-65 ≥moderate, qSOFA ≥2 and NEWS ≥medium identified 85.0%, 96.4%, 40.3% and 79.0% of those who died within 30 days, respectively. A Lac-CURB-65 ≥moderate had the highest negative predictive value: 95.6%. Conclusion: All four scoring systems can stratify according to increasing risk in CAP; however, when a confident diagnosis of pneumonia can be made, these data support the use of pneumonia-specific tools rather than generic sepsis or early warning scores.

Indexed as

Severity of Illness IndexAgedAged, 80 and overCommunity-Acquired InfectionsFemaleHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayMiddle AgedOrgan Dysfunction ScoresPatient AdmissionPneumoniaPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentCAPcommunity acquired pneumoniaCURB65lac-curb-65NEWSqsofasepsis

Identifiers

PMID31258921
PMCPMC6561385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.