Interpretation of results of PCR and B-D-glucan for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis Jirovecii Pneumonia in immunocompromised adults with acute respiratory failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The accuracy of a diagnostic test depends on its intrinsic characteristics and the disease incidence. This study aims to depict post-test probability of Pneumocystis pneumonia (PJP), according to results of PCR and Beta-D-Glucan (BDG) tests in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Diagnostic performance of PCR and BDG was extracted from literature. Incidence of Pneumocystis pneumonia was assessed in a dataset of 2243 non-HIV immunocompromised patients with ARF. Incidence of Pneumocystis pneumonia was simulated assuming a normal distribution in 5000 random incidence samples. Post-test probability was assessed using Bayes theorem. RESULTS: Incidence of PJP in non-HIV ARF patients was 4.1% (95%CI 3.3-5). Supervised classification identified 4 subgroups of interest with incidence ranging from 2.0% (No ground glass opacities; 95%CI 1.4-2.8) to 20.2% (hematopoietic cell transplantation, ground glass opacities and no PJP prophylaxis; 95%CI 14.1-27.7). In the overall population, positive post-test probability was 32.9% (95%CI 31.1-34.8) and 22.8% (95%CI 21.5-24.3) for PCR and BDG, respectively. Negative post-test probability of being infected was 0.10% (95%CI 0.09-0.11) and 0.23% (95%CI 0.21-0.25) for PCR and BDG, respectively. In the highest risk subgroup, positive predictive value was 74.5% (95%CI 72.0-76.7) and 63.8% (95%CI 60.8-65.8) for PCR and BDG, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although both tests yield a high intrinsic performance, the low incidence of PJP in this cohort resulted in a low positive post-test probability. We propose a method to illustrate pre and post-test probability relationship that may improve clinician perception of diagnostic test performance according to disease incidence in predefined clinical settings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".