MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109321313 · doi:10.1128/jcm.00137-13

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of a Urine-Based Pneumococcal Antigen Test for Diagnosis of Community-Acquired Pneumonia Caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae

2013· review· en· W2109321313 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Microbiology · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersMcGill University Health Centre
KeywordsCommunity-acquired pneumoniaMedicineStreptococcus pneumoniaeInternal medicinePneumoniaMeta-analysisBlood cultureGold standard (test)GastroenterologyIntensive care medicineAntibioticsMicrobiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Standard culture methods for diagnosis of Streptococcus pneumoniae pneumonia take at least 24 h. The BinaxNOW urine-based test for S. pneumoniae (BinaxNOW-SP) takes only 15 min to conduct, potentially enabling earlier diagnosis and targeted treatment. This study was conducted to assess whether the use of BinaxNOW-SP at the time of hospital admission would provide adequate sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adult patients. We searched PubMed, EMBASE/OVID, Cochrane Collaboration, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, INAHTA, and CADTH for diagnostic or etiologic studies of hospitalized predominately adult patients with clinically defined CAP that reported the diagnostic performance of BinaxNOW-SP versus cultures. Two authors independently extracted study details and diagnostic two-by-two tables. We found that 27 studies met our inclusion criteria, and three different reference standards were used between them. A bivariate meta-analysis of 12 studies using a composite of culture tests as the reference standard estimated the sensitivity of BinaxNOW-SP as 68.5% (95% credibility interval [CrI], 62.6% to 74.2%) and specificity as 84.2% (95% CrI, 77.5% to 89.3%). A meta-analysis of all 27 studies, adjusting for the imperfect and variable nature of the reference standard, gave a higher sensitivity of 74.0% (CrI, 66.6% to 82·3%) and specificity of 97.2% (CrI, 92.7% to 99.8%). The analysis showed substantial heterogeneity across studies, which did not decrease with adjustment for covariates. We concluded that the higher pooled sensitivity (compared to culture) and high specificity of BinaxNOW-SP suggest it would be a useful addition to the diagnostic workup for community-acquired pneumonia. More research is needed regarding the impact of BinaxNOW-SP on clinical practice.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0280.011
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.165
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it