ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
Incremental diagnostic value of bloodstream pathogen ddPCR for early identification of blood culture-positive bloodstream infection.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bloodstream infection (BSI) is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Early identification remains challenging because blood culture results are often unavailable during initial clinical decision-making. This study evaluated routinely available clinical indicators for identifying blood culture-positive BSI and investigated whether bloodstream pathogen droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) testing provides incremental diagnostic value. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary teaching hospital. A conventional clinical indicator cohort of 814 hospitalized patients was used to develop a prediction model for blood culture-positive BSI. An independent ddPCR cohort of 336 patients was used to evaluate the incremental value of ddPCR testing. Model discrimination, reclassification, exploratory clinical utility, and internal validation were assessed. Results: In the conventional cohort, age (OR 1.021, 95% CI 1.001-1.041, P = 0.038) and ln(PCT) (OR 1.441, 95% CI 1.203-1.727, P < 0.001) were independently associated with blood culture-positive BSI. The conventional clinical model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.696 (95% CI 0.631-0.762). In the ddPCR cohort, incorporation of ddPCR results modestly increased the AUC from 0.716 (95% CI 0.614-0.818) to 0.764 (95% CI 0.665-0.863). Although the increase was not statistically significant by the DeLong test (P = 0.152), significant improvements were observed in integrated discrimination improvement (0.041, P = 0.006) and category-free net reclassification improvement (0.786, P < 0.001). Exploratory decision curve analysis indicated higher net benefit for the combined model. Conclusions: Routinely available clinical indicators provided only modest discriminatory ability for early identification of blood culture-positive BSI. Bloodstream pathogen ddPCR testing provided additional diagnostic information with a modest and statistically non-significant increase in AUC but significant improvement in risk reclassification. ddPCR may serve as a complementary tool for early BSI risk stratification rather than a replacement for blood culture.
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.