The Diagnostic Utility of Induced Sputum Microscopy and Culture in Childhood Pneumonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND.: Sputum microscopy and culture are commonly used for diagnosing the cause of pneumonia in adults but are rarely performed in children due to difficulties in obtaining specimens. Induced sputum is occasionally used to investigate lower respiratory infections in children but has not been widely used in pneumonia etiology studies. METHODS.: We evaluated the diagnostic utility of induced sputum microscopy and culture in patients enrolled in the Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health (PERCH) study, a large study of community-acquired pneumonia in children aged 1-59 months. Comparisons were made between induced sputum samples from hospitalized children with radiographically confirmed pneumonia and children categorized as nonpneumonia (due to the absence of prespecified clinical and laboratory signs and absence of infiltrate on chest radiograph). RESULTS.: One induced sputum sample was available for analysis from 3772 (89.1%) of 4232 suspected pneumonia cases enrolled in PERCH. Of these, sputum from 2608 (69.1%) met the quality criterion of <10 squamous epithelial cells per low-power field, and 1162 (44.6%) had radiographic pneumonia. Induced sputum microscopy and culture results were not associated with radiographic pneumonia, regardless of prior antibiotic use, stratification by specific bacteria, or interpretative criteria used. CONCLUSIONS.: The findings of this study do not support the culture of induced sputum specimens as a diagnostic tool for pneumonia in young children as part of routine 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".