Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36714285›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE2023

Measuring clinical outcomes of highly multiplex molecular diagnostics for respiratory infections: A systematic review and conceptual framework.

Tristan T Timbrook, Tara B Wigmosta, Rachael B Hemmert, Jonathan B Dimas, Alexander Krause, Sébastien Spinali, Meghan Thelen, Isabelle Tongio, Jean-Louis Tissier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE, 2023. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  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

9 authors.

Tristan T TimbrookBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4542-6203
Tara B WigmostaBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.
Rachael B HemmertBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.
Jonathan B DimasBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9177-3740
Alexander KrauseBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1908-4174
Sébastien SpinaliBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.
Meghan ThelenBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.
Isabelle TongioBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.
Jean-Louis TissierBioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To review methodologies and outcomes reporting among these studies and to develop a conceptual framework of outcomes to assist in guiding studies and production of clinical metrics. Data sources: PubMed and Embase from January 1, 2012, thru December 1, 2021. Study eligibility criteria: Studies evaluating highly multiplex molecular respiratory diagnostics and their impact on either clinical or economic outcomes. Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) of methodologies and outcomes reporting was performed. A qualitative synthesis of identified SLRs and associated primary studies was conducted to develop conceptual framework for outcomes. Results: Ultimately, 4 systemic literature reviews and their 12 associated primary studies were selected for review. Most primary studies included patient outcomes focusing on antimicrobial exposure changes such as antibiotic (80%) and antiviral use (50%) or occupancy changes such as hospital length of stay (60%). Economic outcomes were infrequently reported, and societal outcomes, such as antibiotic resistance impact, were absent from the reviewed literature. Qualitative evidence synthesis of reported outcomes yielded a conceptual framework of outcomes to include operational, patient, economic, and societal domains. Conclusions: Our review highlights the significant heterogeneity in outcomes reporting among clinical impact studies for highly multiplex molecular respiratory diagnostics. Furthermore, we developed a conceptual framework of outcomes domains that may act as a guide to improve considerations in outcomes selection and reporting when evaluating clinical impact of these tests. These improvements may be important in synthesizing the evidence for informing clinical decision making, guidelines, and financial reimbursement.

Identifiers

PMID36714285
PMCPMC9879901

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.