ArticleEClinicalMedicine2026
Impact of molecular point-of-care testing for respiratory pathogens on antibiotic use and clinical outcomes in acute respiratory tract infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. 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.
- Rapid Diagnostics for Distinguishing Bacterial and Viral Infections: A Review of Technologies, Clinical Utility, and Stewardship Implications.Biosensors · 2026Review
- Emerging Multimodal Point-of-Care Diagnostic Strategies for Rapid Detection and Management of Respiratory Viruses: A State-of-the-Art Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Diagnostic accuracy of rapid integrated molecular testing for major respiratory viral infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Molecular point-of-care testing (mPOCT) offers rapid identification of respiratory pathogens, but its impact on antibiotic use and patient outcomes remains uncertain. We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the effects of mPOCT on antibiotic use and major clinical outcomes in patients presenting with acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, CNKI, and Wanfang Data from inception to July 1, 2025, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating mPOCT for patients presenting with ARTIs (PROSPERO CRD420251069333). The primary outcome was antibiotic use, assessed using pooled risk ratio (RR) with random-effects models. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using the Risk Of Bias instrument for Use in SysTematic reviews-for Randomised Controlled Trials (ROBUST-RCT) and core Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), respectively. Findings: We included 25 RCTs involving 12,638 patients, of whom 61.0% were adults. Overall, mPOCT probably had little to no important effect on antibiotic use (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-1.00; moderate certainty) or treatment duration (mean difference -0.44 days, 95% CI -0.98 to 0.09; moderate certainty). In adults, high-certainty evidence showed no effect on antibiotic use (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98-1.02), whereas in children, low-certainty evidence suggested a potential reduction (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97). Although mPOCT increased appropriate antibiotic prescribing (RR 2.07, 95% CI 1.55-2.77; moderate certainty), it did not affect 30-day mortality (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82-1.15; high certainty) and intensive care unit admission (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.65-1.25; high certainty). Interpretation: Moderate to high certainty evidence suggests that mPOCT does not meaningfully reduce overall antibiotic use or improve patient outcomes, particularly in adults, despite enhancing prescribing appropriateness. Routine use of mPOCT for adults with ARTIs is therefore not supported. Funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Postdoctoral Science Foundation, the Chongqing Municipality Joint Science and Health Major Medical Research Project, Outstanding Youth in Science and Technology, the Chongqing Youth Talent Fund, and the Research Foundation Flanders.
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.