Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32775698›Full record

ArticleDiagnostic and prognostic research2020

Development of a clinical prediction rule for sepsis in primary care: protocol for the TeSD-IT study.

Feike J Loots, Rogier Hopstaken, Kevin Jenniskens, Geert W J Frederix, Alma C van de Pol, Ann Van den Bruel, Jan Jelrik Oosterheert, Arthur R H van Zanten, Marleen Smits, Theo J M Verheij

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostic and prognostic research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Feike J LootsJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4984-0484
Rogier HopstakenStar-shl Diagnostic Centres, Etten-Leur, The Netherlands.
Kevin JenniskensJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Geert W J FrederixJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Alma C van de PolJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ann Van den BruelDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division Infectious Disease, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jan Jelrik OosterheertAcademic Centre for Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Arthur R H van ZantenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Ede, The Netherlands.
Marleen SmitsRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Scientific Center for Quality of Healthcare (IQ healthcare), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Theo J M VerheijJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLVIB-KU Leuven Center for Microbiology · BEZiekenhuis Gelderse Vallei · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly recognition and treatment of sepsis is crucial to prevent detrimental outcomes. General practitioners (GPs) are often the first healthcare providers to encounter seriously ill patients. The aim of this study is to assess the value of clinical information and additional tests to develop a clinical prediction rule to support early diagnosis and management of sepsis by GPs.

methodsWe will perform a diagnostic study in the setting of out-of-hours home visits in four GP cooperatives in the Netherlands. Acutely ill adult patients suspected of a serious infection will be screened for eligibility by the GP. The following candidate predictors will be prospectively recorded: (1) age, (2) body temperature, (3) systolic blood pressure, (4) heart rate, (5) respiratory rate, (6) peripheral oxygen saturation, (7) mental status, (8) history of rigors, and (9) rate of progression. After clinical assessment by the GP, blood samples will be collected in all patients to measure C-reactive protein, lactate, and procalcitonin. All patients will receive care as usual. The primary outcome is the presence or absence of sepsis within 72 h after inclusion, according to an expert panel. The need for hospital treatment for any indication will be assessed by the expert panel as a secondary outcome. Multivariable logistic regression will be used to design an optimal prediction model first and subsequently derive a simplified clinical prediction rule that enhances feasibility of using the model in daily clinical practice. Bootstrapping will be performed for internal validation of both the optimal model and simplified prediction rule. Performance of both models will be compared to existing clinical prediction rules for sepsis. DISCUSSION: This study will enable us to develop a clinical prediction rule for the recognition of sepsis in a high-risk primary care setting to aid in the decision which patients have to be immediately referred to a hospital and who can be safely treated at home. As clinical signs and blood samples will be obtained prospectively, near-complete data will be available for analyses. External validation will be needed before implementation in routine care and to determine in which pre-hospital settings care can be improved using the prediction rule.

trial registrationThe study is registered in the Netherlands Trial Registry (registration number NTR7026).

Indexed as

Sepsis; Clinical prediction rule; Diagnosis; Primary care; General practice; Out-of-hours medical care; Practitioner cooperative; Point-of-care testing

Identifiers

PMID32775698
PMCPMC7409626
OpenAlexW3047365169

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.