ArticleInfection2020
Blood culture sampling rate in hospitalised children as a quality indicator for diagnostic stewardship.
Article in Infection, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Stewardship of Blood Cultures in the Pediatric ICU Using Machine Learning.Hospital pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRecommendations regarding the optimal number of blood cultures in children are not available. The aim of this article is to describe the correlation between blood culture (BC) rates and laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection (LCBSI) rates, on different paediatric wards of a tertiary-care centre in Germany.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study in a paediatric university hospital, from 1st January to 31st December 2018. All blood cultures collected from neonatal (NICU) and paediatric intensive-care units (PICU), haematology/oncology, and general paediatric wards were included. There were no exclusion criteria. BC taken/1000 patients-days (BC rates/BCR) and LCBSI/1000 patient-days at risk (LCBSI rates) were calculated for each unit.
resultsA total of 6040 patients were admitted to the hospital with 3114 of them into wards studied. Of the 3072 BCs collected, 200 (6.5%) were positive. Collection of BCs was performed in 51/77 (66.2%) of admitted patients on NICU, in 151/399 (37.8%) of PICU patients, in 163/755 (21.6%) of haematology/oncology patients, and in 281/1883 (14.9%) of children on general paediatric wards. Gram-positive bacteria were the most commonly detected organisms in blood cultures from all wards with exception of NICU. The BCR in NICU, PICU, haematology/oncology wards, and general wards were 61.6, 196.2, 358.4, and 52.3, respectively. Excluding commensal pathogens and possible contaminations, the LCBSI rates in the same units were 2.4, 5.6, 4.4, and 1.0, respectively.
conclusionWe found different BCR values according the ward studied, being higher in patients with high risk of bloodstream infection such as haematology/oncology patients.
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.