ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2024
Validation of a whole blood machine learning strategy for distinguishing between bacterial and viral infection in a pediatric hospital setting.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic power of LIAISON MeMed VB® for bacterial infection in adults patients seen in Emergency Departments due to infections.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2024Observational
- Review: Diagnostic Potential for Collaborative Pharyngitis Biomarkers.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Similar symptoms between viral and bacterial diseases often make diagnosis difficult. This study assessed the clinical performance of the newly cleared whole-blood Bacterial versus Viral Score assay in our pediatric cohort to the previously validated serum assay and emergency department physician diagnosis. This assay shows excellent agreement (R = 0.997) with the serum assay and has great diagnostic accuracy when compared to physician diagnosis.
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.