Molecular Point-of-Care Testing in the Emergency Department for Group A Streptococcus Pharyngitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical and health systems outcomes of rapid molecular testing versus throat culture recovery for the management of group A Streptococcus (GAS) pharyngitis in a pediatric emergency department (PED). METHODS: We conducted a single-center randomized trial of children (3-17 years) presenting to a PED with suspected GAS pharyngitis. A single dual-headed throat swab was collected, and participants were randomized to 1 of 2 parallel treatment groups with 1:1 allocation: point-of-care (POC) nucleic acid amplification testing or standard throat culture. The primary outcomes were time to throat pain +/- fever resolution. Secondary outcomes included absenteeism, length of stay, return visits to care, and antibiotic prescriptions and utilization. RESULTS: A total of 227 children were randomly assigned to culture (n = 115) or POC (n = 112) testing. Antibiotics were initiated earlier in the POC group by approximately 1 day (95% confidence interval, -0.40 to -1.58). No associated difference in time to throat pain or fever resolution was observed between groups. There was a decrease in the proportion of prescribed antibiotics in the POC group (0.35) compared with the culture group (0.79; P < 0.001). Otherwise, no significant differences in secondary outcomes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing a POC nucleic acid amplification testing program for GAS in a PED facilitates earlier treatment and fewer antibiotic prescriptions. Although this did not translate to improved clinical and health systems outcomes in our study, it may serve as an important tool amid evolving pediatric febrile illnesses and growing antimicrobial resistance patterns.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".