ArticleBMC pediatrics2022
Risk-stratification in febrile infants 29 to 60 days old: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent advancements in pediatric purulent meningitis: diagnosis and treatment.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Age-Stratified Clinical and Microbiological Profiles in Pediatric Infectious Disease Admissions: Implications for Risk Prediction and Antimicrobial Stewardship.Pharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Application of the PECARN prediction rule for febrile infants up to 90 days of age: a multi-center study.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Adding heart rate n-variability (HRnV) to clinical assessment potentially improves prediction of serious bacterial infections in young febrile infants at the emergency department: a prospective observational study.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultiple clinical prediction rules have been published to risk-stratify febrile infants ≤60 days of age for serious bacterial infections (SBI), which is present in 8-13% of infants. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of strategies to identify infants with SBI in the emergency department.
methodsWe developed a Markov decision model to estimate outcomes in well-appearing, febrile term infants, using the following strategies: Boston, Rochester, Philadelphia, Modified Philadelphia, Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN), Step-by-Step, Aronson, and clinical suspicion. Infants were categorized as low risk or not low risk using each strategy. Simulated cohorts were followed for 1 year from a healthcare perspective. Our primary model focused on bacteremia, with secondary models for urinary tract infection and bacterial meningitis. One-way, structural, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The main outcomes were SBI correctly diagnosed and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
resultsIn the bacteremia model, the PECARN strategy was the least expensive strategy ($3671, 0.779 QALYs). The Boston strategy was the most cost-effective strategy and cost $9799/QALY gained. All other strategies were less effective and more costly. Despite low initial costs, clinical suspicion was among the most expensive and least effective strategies. Results were sensitive to the specificity of selected strategies. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the Boston strategy was most likely to be favored at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. In the urinary tract infection model, PECARN was preferred compared to other strategies and the Boston strategy was preferred in the bacterial meningitis model.
conclusionsThe Boston clinical prediction rule offers an economically reasonable strategy compared to alternatives for identification of SBI.
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.