ArticleCureus2021
Relationship Between Medical Questionnaire and Influenza Rapid Test Positivity: Subjective Pretest Probability, "I Think I Have Influenza," Contributes to the Positivity Rate.
Article in Cureus, 2021. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs) are considered essential for determining when to start influenza treatment using anti-influenza drugs, but their accuracy is about 70%. Under the COVID-19 pandemic, we hope to refrain from performing unnecessary RIDTs considering droplet infection of COVID-19 and influenza. We re-examined the medical questionnaire's importance and its relationship to the positivity of RIDTs. Then we built a positivity prediction model for RIDTs using automated artificial intelligence (AI). Methods We retrospectively investigated 96 patients who underwent RIDTs at the outpatient department from December 2019 to March 2020. We used a questionnaire sheet with 24 items before conducting RIDTs. The factors associated with the positivity of RIDTs were statistically analyzed. We then used an automated AI framework to produce the positivity prediction model using the 24 items, sex, and age, with five-fold cross-validation. Results Of the 47 women and 49 men (median age was 39 years), 56 patients were RIDT positive with influenza A. The AI-based model using 26 variables had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.980. The stronger variables are subjective pretest probability, which is a numerically described score ranging from 0% to 100% of "I think I have influenza," cough, past hours after the onset, muscle pain, and maximum body temperature in order. Conclusion We easily built the RIDT positivity prediction model using automated AI. Its AUC was satisfactory, and it suggested the importance of a detailed medical interview. Both the univariate analysis and AI-based model suggested that subjective pretest probability, "I think I have influenza," might be useful.
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.