ArticleJournal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society2025
Use and Stewardship of Molecular Testing for Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: A Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying Quality Care: The Financial Argument for Protecting Time for Quality Improvement Work by Infectious Diseases Physicians.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Cerebrospinal Fluid Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing in Pediatric Central Nervous System Infection: Clinical Experience and Diagnostic Stewardship Strategies.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- The clinical impact of herpesvirus testing on multiplex PCR panels in a pediatric population.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Untargeted molecular tests are increasingly available for the diagnosis of infectious diseases. In this national survey, plasma metagenomic next-generation sequencing had widespread use (89.8%), but disparate frequency from a few times ever (18.4%) to > weekly (9.6%). Respondents offered thoughtful insights into stewardship and future research needs.
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.