SynthesisBMJ paediatrics open2026
Diagnostic accuracy of tachypnoea for predicting mortality and identifying sepsis in young infants aged 0-59 days: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ paediatrics open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTachypnoea is a danger sign for predicting mortality and identifying sepsis. We systematically reviewed evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of different tachypnoea thresholds for predicting mortality and sepsis in infants aged 0-59 days.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus and CENTRAL for studies reporting associations or diagnostic accuracy of tachypnoea (≥60, ≥70 or ≥80 breaths per minute (bpm)) for predicting mortality and culture-confirmed sepsis in infants aged 0-59 days. We followed Cochrane methods for study screening, data extraction and quality assessment. We pooled ORs using random-effects models and sensitivity/specificity using random-effects bivariate models. We used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to assess the certainty of evidence.
resultsOf 7641 studies identified, 18 were included (n=92 398). Tachypnoea≥60 bpm had a pooled OR of 3.14 (95% CI 1.30 to 7.56; 5 studies; n=10 407) for predicting mortality and a sensitivity of 31% (95% CI 19% to 45%) and a specificity of 89% (95% CI 66% to 97%; 4 studies; n=7104). For culture-confirmed sepsis, tachypnoea≥60 bpm had an OR of 1.26 (95% CI 0.66 to 2.38; 4 studies; n=3996), and a sensitivity of 28% (95% CI 10% to 58%) and a specificity of 67% (95% CI 53% to 78%; 3 studies; n=693). The higher threshold of tachypnoea≥70 bpm was associated with a higher odds of mortality (OR 10.06 (95% CI 2.39 to 42.35); 2 studies; n=12 138) and resulted in higher specificity (99.4% (95% CI 99.1% to 99.6%)) but lower sensitivity (10.9% (95% CI 5.3% to 19.1%)) for mortality (1 study; n=5214). Data were insufficient to assess performance by age subgroup (0-6 vs 7-59 days). The certainty of evidence was very low.
conclusionsTachypnoea≥60 bpm is associated with a threefold increased odds of mortality in young infants, supporting its use as a danger sign. Given its relatively low sensitivity alone, tachypnoea should be interpreted alongside other clinical signs to optimise diagnostic accuracy. While higher thresholds (≥70 bpm) demonstrated stronger associations and increased specificity for predicting mortality, low sensitivity may limit clinical utility. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023431387.
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.