Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36316633›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2022

Current state and practice variation in the use of Meningitis/Encephalitis (ME) FilmArray panel in children.

Prabi Rajbhandari, Nathaniel Goodrich, Aleisha M Nabower, Miraides F Brown, Maheswari Ekambaram, Jaclyn Eisenberg, Michael L Forbes, Nathan Gollehon, Kimberly C Martin, Russell McCulloh and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

13 authors.

Prabi RajbhandariAkron Children's Hospital, One Perkins Square, Akron, OH, USA.
Nathaniel GoodrichUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA. ngoodric@unmc.edu.
Aleisha M NabowerUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Miraides F BrownAkron Children's Hospital, One Perkins Square, Akron, OH, USA.
Maheswari EkambaramBaylor Scott &White Medical Center, 300 University Blvd, Round Rock, TX, USA.
Jaclyn EisenbergThe University of Chicago Medicine, 5841 S. Maryland Avenue, Chicago, IL, USA.
Michael L ForbesAkron Children's Hospital, One Perkins Square, Akron, OH, USA.
Nathan GollehonUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Kimberly C MartinUniversity of Oklahoma-Tulsa School of Community Medicine, Tulsa, OK, USA.
Russell McCullohUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA.
Bryan StoneUniversity of Utah Health, 50 North Medical Drive, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Matt TandyUniversity of Oklahoma-Tulsa School of Community Medicine, Tulsa, OK, USA.
Jessica SnowdenUniversity of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Little Rock, Arkansas, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Meningitis/Encephalitis FilmArray® Panel (ME panel) was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2015 and provides rapid results when assessing patients with suspected meningitis or encephalitis. These patients are evaluated by various subspecialties including pediatric hospital medicine (PHM), pediatric emergency medicine (PEM), pediatric infectious diseases, and pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) physicians. The objective of this study was to evaluate the current use of the ME panel and describe the provider and subspecialty practice variation.

methodsWe conducted an online cross-sectional survey via the American Academy of Pediatrics Section of Hospital Medicine (AAP-SOHM) ListServe, Brown University PEM ListServe, and PICU Virtual pediatric system (VPS) Listserve.

resultsA total of 335 participants out of an estimated 6998 ListServe subscribers responded to the survey. 68% reported currently using the ME panel at their institutions. Among test users, most reported not having institutional guidelines on test indications (75%) or interpretation (76%). 58% of providers self-reported lack of knowledge of the test's performance characteristics. Providers from institutions that have established guidelines reported higher knowledge compared to those that did not (51% vs. 38%; p = 0.01). More PHM providers reported awareness of ME panel performance characteristics compared to PEM physicians (48% vs. 27%; p = 0.004); confidence in test interpretation was similar between both groups (72 vs. 69%; p = 0.80).

conclusionDespite the widespread use of the ME panel, few providers report having institutional guidelines on test indications or interpretation. There is an opportunity to provide knowledge and guidance about the ME panel among various pediatric subspecialties.

Indexed as

EncephalitisMeningitisPhysiciansChildCross-Sectional StudiesHumans

Identifiers

PMID36316633
PMCPMC9620602

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.