Elevated Inflammatory Markers Combined With Positive Pneumococcal Urinary Antigen Are a Good Predictor of Pneumococcal Community-acquired Pneumonia in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our objective was to evaluate procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) as predictors of a pneumococcal etiology in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in hospitalized children. METHODS: Children requiring hospitalization for CAP were prospectively enrolled. The following indices were determined: antibodies against pneumococcal surface proteins (anti-PLY, pneumococcal histidine triad D, pneumococcal histidine triad E, LytB and pneumococcal choline-binding protein A), viral serology, nasopharyngeal cultures and polymerase chain reaction for 13 respiratory viruses, blood pneumococcal polymerase chain reaction, pneumococcal urinary antigen, PCT and CRP. Presumed pneumococcal CAP (P-CAP) was defined as a positive blood culture or polymerase chain reaction for Streptococcus pneumoniae or as a pneumococcal surface protein seroresponse (≥2-fold increase). RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were included from which 37 (49%) met the criteria of P-CAP. Elevated PCT and CRP values were strongly associated with P-CAP with odds ratios of 23 (95% confidence interval: 5-117) for PCT and 19 (95% confidence interval: 5-75) for CRP in multivariate analysis. The sensitivity was 94.4% for PCT (cutoff: 1.5 ng/mL) and 91.9% for CRP (cutoff: 100 mg/L). A value≤0.5 ng/mL of PCT ruled out P-CAP in >90% of cases (negative likelihood ratio: 0.08). Conversely, a PCT value≥1.5 ng/mL associated with a positive pneumococcal urinary antigen had a diagnostic probability for P-CAP of almost 80% (positive likelihood ratio: 4.59). CONCLUSIONS: PCT and CRP are reliable predictors of P-CAP. Low cutoff values of PCT allow identification of children at low risk of P-CAP. The association of elevated PCT or CRP with a positive pneumococcal urinary antigen is a strong predictor of P-CAP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".