ArticleScientific reports2023
Evaluation of a new point-of-care diagnostic test measuring inflammation in emergency settings.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Erythrocyte aggregation kinetics is accelerated in diseases with a strong inflammation component. This study aimed to evaluate whether, in an emergency setting, a new point-of-care test measuring erythrocyte aggregation kinetics (EAK) can identify patients with underlying inflammation. Patients visiting an emergency department and needing a blood exam were successively included. EAK was measured at the point-of-care in 20 s directly on the blood samples collected in regular tubes without any manipulation. The primary measure was EAK's half-life during the first 5 s (EAK5s). Each patient's inflammation status was assessed blind to the EAK test results. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves for inflammation status were built. 268 patients had their EAK5s measured, and a clear inflammation status was determined for 214 patients (65 had inflammation). Mean EAK5s were 2.18 s and 1.75 s for no inflammation and inflammation groups respectively (p < 0.001). EAK5s appears to be a better inflammation marker than C-Reactive protein (CRP), with an area under the ROC curve of 0.845 compared to 0.806 for CRP (p < 0.0001). The Youden threshold for prediction of inflammation was 1.86 s with 84.6% (78.5-89.9%) specificity and 70.8% (60-81.5%) sensitivity. Point-of-care EAK is an easily measured, immediately available marker of inflammation with a better predictive power than CRP's.
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.