Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36773367›Full record

ArticleJournal of critical care2023

Assessing a standardized decision-making algorithm for blood culture collection in the intensive care unit.

Alana Siev, Elana Levy, Jen-Ting Chen, Inessa Gendlina, Austin Saline, Parry Mendapara, Michelle Ng Gong, Ari Moskowitz

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of critical care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Reducing unnecessary blood cultures in oncology through algorithmic stewardship in a tertiary medical center.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alana SievMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, USA; Montefiore Medical Center, Department of Medicine, USA. Electronic address: sieva@mskcc.org.
Elana LevyMontefiore Medical Center, Department of Medicine, USA.
Jen-Ting ChenMontefiore Medical Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, USA; University of California San Francisco, Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, USA.
Inessa GendlinaMontefiore Medical Center, Department of Infectious Diseases, USA.
Austin SalineMontefiore Medical Center, Department of Neurology, USA.
Parry MendaparaMontefiore Medical Center, Department of Medicine, USA.
Michelle Ng GongMontefiore Medical Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, USA.
Ari MoskowitzMontefiore Medical Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, USA.
Montefiore Medical Center · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBlood cultures are commonly ordered for patients with low risk of bacteremia. Indications for obtaining blood cultures are often broad and ill defined, and decision algorithms for appropriate blood cultures have not been comprehensively evaluated in critically-ill populations.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis to assess the frequency of inappropriate blood cultures in the ICUs at Montefiore Medical Center based on an evidence-based guidance algorithm. Blood cultures were reviewed against this algorithm to determine their appropriateness. We calculated the prevalence of inappropriate blood culture and explored the reasons for these collected cultures.

results300 patients were randomly selected from an initial cohort of 3370 patients. 294 patients were included and of these, 167 patients had at least 1 blood culture drawn. 125 patients had one or more inappropriate blood culture. 61.4% of blood cultures drawn were assessed to be inappropriate. The most common reason for inappropriate cultures was a culture drawn as a result of isolated fever or leukocytosis.

conclusionIn a cohort of critically-ill patients, inappropriate blood cultures were common. The indications for blood cultures are often not evidence-based, and evidence-based algorithms to guide the collection of blood cultures may offer a way to decrease inappropriate culture orders.

Indexed as

BacteremiaBlood CultureCritical IllnessHumansIntensive Care UnitsRetrospective StudiesBlood culturesFever workupICUInappropriate culturesIntensive care

Identifiers

PMID36773367
PMCPMC10548340
OpenAlexW4319778040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.