ArticleBMC pediatrics2025
Procalcitonin use in febrile children attending European emergency departments: a prospective multicenter study.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2025. 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.
- Lung ultrasound combined with C-reactive protein for identifying a bacterial component in children hospitalized with acute lower respiratory tract infections: a prospective observational study.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Observational
- Diagnostic testing and antibiotic stewardship for pneumonia in children worldwide: current developments and next steps.Current opinion in pediatrics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudies on procalcitonin (PCT) for identifying sepsis were published as early as 1993 and since then, PCT has been the topic of over 8,500 studies. Several studies show PCT to be superior to CRP in differentiating invasive infections such as sepsis from viral infections, especially early in the disease course. However, its actual use in clinical practice is poorly documented. Our aim was to study the use of PCT in febrile children attending the ED across Europe and compare this to the use of CRP.
methodsThe MOFICHE/PERFORM study, a prospective multicenter study, took place at 12 European EDs in eight countries and included febrile children < 18 years. In this secondary analysis of nine participating EDs that used PCT, descriptive analyses were performed, describing the use of PCT in all febrile children and for different age groups, foci of fever and fever duration.
resultsIn total, 31,612 pediatric febrile episodes were available for analyses. Blood tests were performed in 15,812 (50.0%, range 9.6-92.6%)) febrile episodes. CRP was included in 98.3% of blood tests (range between hospitals 80-100%), while PCT was included in only 3.9% (range 0.1-86%). PCT was most often performed in children below 3 months (12.0% versus 3.6% in older children, p < 0.001). PCT was used slightly more often in children with fever less than 24 h in comparison to children with a duration of fever ≥ 24 h (4.9% versus 3.4%, p < 0.001). Regarding clinical alarming signs, PCT was used most often in children with meningeal signs (7.0%) or a non-blanching rash (10.9%).
conclusionActual PCT use in febrile children at European EDs is limited and varies largely between hospitals. Possible explanations include lack of guidelines, limited availability, higher costs and lack of readiness to adapt new clinical strategies.
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.