Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37425493›Full record

ArticleIntensive care medicine. Paediatric and neonatal2023

A qualitative investigation of paediatric intensive care staff attitudes towards the diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infection in the molecular diagnostics era.

John A Clark, Andrew Conway Morris, Constantinos Kanaris, David Inwald, Warwick Butt, Joshua Osowicki, Luregn J Schlapbach, Martin D Curran, Deborah White, Esther Daubney and 5 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive care medicine. Paediatric and neonatal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04233268 (RASCALS), which is not on this 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, top 49% 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.

NCT04233268 unknown statusnot on this map

RASCALS: Rapid Assay for Sick Children With Acute Lung Infection Study

TypeobservationalSponsorCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustRan2020 to 2025Enrolled250ConditionsLower Respiratory Tract Infection, Ventilator Associated Pneumonia, COVID19ArmsRapid Pathogen Detection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

John A ClarkDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Cambridge, Level 8, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6916-9195
Andrew Conway MorrisCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3211-3216
Constantinos KanarisCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4017-4553
David InwaldCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9518-7821
Warwick ButtPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3543-1014
Joshua OsowickiInfectious Diseases Unit, Department of General Medicine, Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9432-6700
Luregn J SchlapbachDepartment of Intensive Care and Neonatology and Children's Research Center, University Children's Hospital Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2281-2598
Martin D CurranUnited Kingdom Health Security Agency, Clinical Microbiology and Public Health Laboratory, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1589-5850
Deborah WhiteCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9254-996X
Esther DaubneyCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1206-0169
Shruti AgrawalDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Cambridge, Level 8, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8695-1314
Vilas NavapurkarCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3610-3568
M Estée TörökCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9098-8590
Stephen BakerCambridge Institute of Therapeutic Immunology and Infectious Disease, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1308-5755
Nazima PathanDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Cambridge, Level 8, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9447-4252
Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLAmsterdam University of Applied Sciences · NLErasmus MC · NL

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/V006118/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In the past decade, molecular diagnostic syndromic arrays incorporating a range of bacterial and viral pathogens have been described. It is unclear how paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) staff diagnose lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) and integrate diagnostic array results into antimicrobial decision-making. Methods: An online survey with eleven questions was distributed throughout paediatric intensive care societies in the UK, continental Europe and Australasia with a total of 755 members. Participants were asked to rate the clinical factors and investigations they used when prescribing for LRTI. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with staff who participated in a single-centre observational study of a 52-pathogen diagnostic array. Results: Seventy-two survey responses were received; most responses were from senior doctors. Whilst diagnostic arrays were used less frequently than routine investigations (i.e. microbiological culture), they were of comparable perceived utility when making antimicrobial decisions. Prescribers reported that for arrays to be clinically impactful, they would need to deliver results within 6 h for stable patients and within 1 h for unstable patients to inform their immediate decision to prescribe antimicrobials. From 16 staff interviews, we identified that arrays were helpful for the diagnosis and screening of bacterial LRTI. Staff reported it could be challenging to interpret results in some cases due to the high sensitivity of the test. Therefore, results were considered within the context of the patient and discussed within the multidisciplinary team. Conclusions: Diagnostic arrays were considered of comparable value to microbiological investigations by PICU prescribers. Our findings support the need for further clinical and economic evaluation of diagnostic arrays in a randomised control trial. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04233268. Registered on 18 January 2020. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44253-023-00008-z.

Indexed as

Critical careDiagnostic techniquesEvaluationsPaediatricPneumoniaQualitativeRespiratory system

Identifiers

PMID37425493
PMCPMC10329081
OpenAlexW4242201743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.