Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34932016›Full record

Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2021

Use of the McIsaac Score to Predict Group A Streptococcal Pharyngitis in Outpatient Nurse Phone Triage and Electronic Visits Compared With In-Person Visits: Retrospective Observational Study.

Jennifer L Pecina, Leah M Nigon, Kristine S Penza, Martha A Murray, Beckie J Kronebusch, Nathaniel E Miller, Teresa B Jensen

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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, 8 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer L PecinaDepartment of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1970-1344
Leah M NigonDepartment of Nursing, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7209-1624
Kristine S PenzaMayo Clinic Express Care, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4293-1527
Martha A MurrayMayo Clinic Express Care, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8683-2435
Beckie J KronebuschDepartment of Nursing, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0995-1796
Nathaniel E MillerDepartment of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4646-1748
Teresa B JensenDepartment of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4280-2127
Mayo Clinic in Arizona · USMayo Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe McIsaac criteria are a validated scoring system used to determine the likelihood of an acute sore throat being caused by group A streptococcus (GAS) to stratify patients who need strep testing.

objectiveWe aim to compare McIsaac criteria obtained during face-to-face (f2f) and non-f2f encounters.

methodsThis retrospective study compared the percentage of positive GAS tests by McIsaac score for scores calculated during nurse protocol phone encounters, e-visits (electronic visits), and in person f2f clinic visits.

resultsThere was no difference in percentages of positive strep tests between encounter types for any of the McIsaac scores. There were significantly more phone and e-visit encounters with any missing score components compared with f2f visits. For individual score components, there were significantly fewer e-visits missing fever and cough information compared with phone encounters and f2f encounters. F2f encounters were significantly less likely to be missing descriptions of tonsils and lymphadenopathy compared with phone and e-visit encounters. McIsaac scores of 4 had positive GAS rates of 55% to 68% across encounter types. There were 4 encounters not missing any score components with a McIsaac score of 0. None of these 4 encounters had a positive GAS test.

conclusionsMcIsaac scores of 4 collected during non-f2f care could be used to consider empiric treatment for GAS without testing if significant barriers to testing exist such as the COVID-19 pandemic or geographic barriers. Future studies should evaluate further whether non-f2f encounters with McIsaac scores of 0 can be safely excluded from GAS testing.

Indexed as

COVID-19PharyngitisElectronicsHumansOutpatientsPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2Triageelectronic visite-visitgroup A streptococcusMcIssac scorenursenurse phone triagephonescoring systemsore throatstrep pharygitistelecaretelehealthtelemedicinetriagevirtual visit

Identifiers

PMID34932016
PMCPMC8726036
OpenAlexW4200445605

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.