SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2025
Diagnostic value of procalcitonin for identifying the etiology of lower respiratory tract infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 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.
- The Role and Importance of Procalcitonin (PCT) Testing in Rational Antibiotic Prescribing and Antibiotic Stewardship Programs.Immunity, inflammation and disease · 2026Review
- Machine learning-based identification of inflammatory biomarkers for predicting pulmonary consolidation in children with Chlamydia pneumoniae infection.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDifferentiating pathogens of lower respiratory tract infections(LRTIs) is challenging. This study aims to determine whether procalcitonin(PCT) level could distinguish different pathogens in adults with LRTIs.
methodsWe searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trails that identified all relevant diagnostic accuracy studies. Studies were assessed for reporting of diagnostic accuracy, relevance and quality. Data were extracted for meta-analysis.
results18 trials involving 3174 patients were included. For differentiating bacteria from viruses, pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio(+LR), negative likelihood ratio(−LR) and diagnostic odds ratio(DOR) for PCT(0·5ug/L) were 0.49(95%CI, 0.33–0.66), 0.80(95%CI,0.65–0.90), 2.48(95%CI,1.75–3.50), 0.63 (95%CI, 0.52–0.77) and 3.93(95%CI,2.87–5.37), respectively. For differentiating typical pathogens from atypical pathogens, pooled sensitivity, specificity, +LR, -LR and DOR for PCT(0·5ug/L) were 0.60(95%CI,0.41–0.76), 0.81(95%CI,0.61–0.92), 3.09(95%CI,1.80–5.32), 0.50(95%CI,0.37–0.68) and 6.20(95%CI,3.76–10.21), respectively.
conclusionsThe results of this meta-analysis showed that PCT has moderate diagnostic accuracy for lower respiratory tract pathogens such as bacteria, viruses, and atypical pathogens.
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.