Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38414813›Full record

ArticleJAC-antimicrobial resistance2024

Scoping review of risk-scoring tools for early prediction of bloodstream infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales: do we really have a reliable risk-scoring tool?

Abdullah Tarik Aslan, Yukiko Ezure, Patrick N A Harris, David L Paterson

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JAC-antimicrobial resistance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Abdullah Tarik AslanFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, UQ Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), Level 8, Building 71/918 Bowen Bridge Rd Herston, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7844-8097
Yukiko EzureFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, UQ Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), Level 8, Building 71/918 Bowen Bridge Rd Herston, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia.
Patrick N A HarrisFaculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, UQ Centre for Clinical Research (UQCCR), Level 8, Building 71/918 Bowen Bridge Rd Herston, Brisbane, QLD 4029, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2895-0345
David L PatersonADVANCE-ID, Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) are a global health concern. Rapid identification of CRE may improve patient outcomes and reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescription. The use of risk-scoring tools (RSTs) can be valuable for optimizing the decision-making process for empirical antibiotic therapy of suspected CRE bacteraemia. These tools can also be used to triage use of expensive rapid diagnostic methods. Methods: We systematically reviewed the relevant literature in PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, Embase and Scopus up to 1 November 2022 to identify RSTs that predict CRE BSIs. The literature review and analysis of the articles were performed by two researchers; any inconsistencies were resolved through discussion. Results: We identified 9 RSTs developed for early prediction of CRE BSIs and only logistic regression was used for most studies. These RSTs were quite different from each other in terms of their performance and the variables they included. They also had notable limitations and very few of them were externally validated. Conclusions: RSTs for early prediction of CRE BSIs have limitations and lack of external validity outside the local setting in which they were developed. Future studies to identify optimal RSTs in high and low CRE-endemic settings are warranted. Approaches based on rapid diagnostics and RSTs should be compared with a treatment approach using both methods in a randomized controlled trial.

Identifiers

PMID38414813
PMCPMC10899000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.