Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39526644›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of primary health care2025

Validation of point-of-care tests used at in-home assessments among older adults in primary care.

Siri Aas Smedemark, Ditte Beck Jepsen, Karen Andersen-Ranberg, Mads Nybo

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of primary health care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Siri Aas SmedemarkGeriatric Research Unit, Department of Geriatric Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2642-9019
Ditte Beck JepsenGeriatric Research Unit, Department of Geriatric Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-8585-4165
Karen Andersen-RanbergGeriatric Research Unit, Department of Geriatric Medicine, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-1970-7076
Mads NyboDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-3029-2855

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiagnosing acute disease in older adults is challenged by vague and atypical symptoms. Point-of-care tests (POCTs) at home may improve diagnostics and clinical decision-making. We compared various POCT devices to routine testing in acutely ill older adults to assess their clinical reliability.

methodsWe enrolled participants aged 65+ years requiring acute in-home assessment with signs of acute conditions. Venous and capillary blood samples were collected and analysed on-site using POCT, while identical samples were transported and analysed in a routine laboratory. Agreement between POCT and laboratory testing was assessed using scatter plots with linear regression, Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC), limits of agreement, and Bland-Altman plots. Misclassification rates were calculated based on clinically meaningful cut-offs to assess POCT's clinical reliability.

resultsWe included 100 participants with a mean age of 81.6 (±8.4 SD) years. Strong correlation was found between POCT and routine measurements (PCC: 0.76-0.94 for capillary samples and 0.85-0.98 for venous samples). Venous samples showed higher PCC than capillary, except for neutrophils (0.93 for capillary, 0.89 for venous). Misclassification occurred in capillary samples for haemoglobin (10/62) and total WBC (6/50), while in venous samples, misclassification was observed for haemoglobin (4/54), total WBC (4/50), K

conclusionPOCT provides acceptable, clinically reliable measurements in acutely ill older adults, potentially enhancing diagnostics and treatments during in-home assessment. Venous blood testing is preferable due to a lower misclassification rate, but capillary blood remains a pragmatic alternative, despite higher variation and inaccuracy.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsPoint-of-Care TestingPrimary Health CareAcute DiseaseAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGeriatric AssessmentHumansMaleReproducibility of Resultsbiochemical analysesin-home assessmentsolder adultsPoint-of-care testvalidation

Identifiers

PMID39526644
PMCPMC12090298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.