36 Management of a positive blood culture in paediatric emergency department: A multicenter case-based survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Positive blood cultures in paediatric Emergency Departments (ED) represent a diagnostic dilemma for clinicians as 50% are due to contaminants. As such, the risk of misinterpretation is costly and can lead to inappropriate antibiotic use, blood tests, and hospitalization. Despite the prevalence and ramifications of this diagnostic uncertainty, current clinical practice lack established guidelines. Objectives Our aim was to characterize the management of positive blood cultures by physicians working in paediatric EDs across Canada. In addition, we identified factors influencing how physicians distinguish true bacteremia from contaminants. Design/Methods A self-administered electronic survey was sent to all members of the Paediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) network in 2024 using the principles of the Dillman’s Tailored design method. The survey was constructed using standardized methodology. Potential risk factors of bacteremia were identified based on a literature review and consultation of multiple experts. The survey consisted of three clinical cases, modeled off real patients, and was pilot tested by a group of physicians. Each case highlighted a common clinical scenario in which physicians had to interpret the significance of a positive blood culture. There were follow-up questions to further assess clinical decision-making and provide demographic information. The primary outcome was the management of a positive blood culture according to the participant. Results Of the 221 PERC members invited, 153 (69%) were included in the final analysis. In brief, 65% of the participants were trained in paediatric emergency medicine and 55% had more than 15 years of experience. The management of the case scenarios was heterogeneous, for example, 49% of participants would have discharged a 9-week-old with a positive culture and otherwise normal blood results and absence of fever at follow-up, while 35% suggested hospitalization with IV antibiotics. Most participants identified young age, immunocompromised status, and shorter time to blood culture positivity as risk factors for true bacteremia, though consensus on time-to-positivity remained unclear. Only 17% of physicians reported use of a clinical guideline, largely from one site, and 98% reported that they would be willing to adopt a clinical decision rule if it had a high sensitivity. Conclusion This study highlights the considerable variation in practice across Canadian paediatric EDs and the need for standardized guidelines. Young age, immunocompromised status, and shorter time to blood culture positivity are risk factors used by ED physicians to assess the probability of true bacteremia among children with positive blood culture.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".