ReviewThe journal of applied laboratory medicine2025
Blood Culture Contamination and Diagnostic Stewardship: From a Clinical Laboratory Quality Monitor to a National Patient Safety Measure.
Review in The journal of applied laboratory medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Four-day versus five-day blood culture incubation: a prospective study of diagnostic performance using the bioMérieux BACT/ALERT VIRTUO system.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Blood culture practices and microbiological capacity for sepsis diagnostics in Europe (2021-2022): a cross-sectional analysis of the European Sepsis Care Survey.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- A Systematic Review of Bacterial Sampling Collection for Veterinary Microbiology in Companion Animals.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Using nanopore metagenomics to characterize pathogens in febrile patients from a highland of Western Kenya.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic stewardship in sepsis: minding the gap from the microbiology lab to ward.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2025Review
- Standardized surveillance of blood culture contamination rates: moving toward a universal standard.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- The Impact of a Nationwide Blood Culture Bottle Shortage in 2024 on Healthcare Facilities in the United States.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Article
- Multicenter evaluation of blood culture contamination and blood cultures practices in US acute care hospitals: time for standardization.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Laboratory analysis of blood cultures is vital to the accurate and timely diagnosis of bloodstream infections. However, the reliability of the test depends on clinical compliance with standard operating procedures that limit the risk of inconclusive or incorrect results. False-negative blood culture results due to inadequate volumes of blood can result in misdiagnosis, delay therapy, and increase patients' risk of developing or dying from bloodstream infections. Likewise, commonly occurring bacteria or fungi on human skin (i.e., commensal organisms) can contaminate the blood culture during collection and increase the risk of false positives, compromising care and leading to unnecessary antibiotic therapy and prolonged hospitalization. In December 2022, a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) consensus-based entity (CBE) endorsed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) proposal for a new patient safety measure to address these concerns. CDC developed this quality measure to promote the standardization of blood culture best practices and improve laboratory diagnosis of bloodstream infections nationally. This special report will emphasize the importance of standardizing blood culture collection and describe the need for a national patient safety measure, new quality tools, and next steps.
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.