Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Validity of Clinical Severity Scores for Respiratory Syncytial Virus: A Systematic Review.
Sheikh, Zakariya; Potter, Ellie; Li, You; Cohen, Rachel A; Dos Santos, Gaël; Bont, Louis; Nair, Harish.
Afiliação
  • Sheikh Z; Edinburgh Medical School, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
  • Potter E; Edinburgh Medical School, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
  • Li Y; School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, China.
  • Cohen RA; Epidemiology Viral Non-respiratory VaccinesValue Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Wavre, Belgium.
  • Dos Santos G; Epidemiology Bacterial Vaccines, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Wavre, Belgium.
  • Bont L; Department of Pediatrics, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Nair H; School of Public Health, Nanjing Medical University, China.
J Infect Dis ; 229(Supplement_1): S8-S17, 2024 Mar 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37797314
BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a widespread respiratory pathogen, and RSV-related acute lower respiratory tract infections are the most common cause of respiratory hospitalization in children <2 years of age. Over the last 2 decades, a number of severity scores have been proposed to quantify disease severity for RSV in children, yet there remains no overall consensus on the most clinically useful score. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of English-language publications in peer-reviewed journals published since January 2000 assessing the validity of severity scores for children (≤24 months of age) with RSV and/or bronchiolitis, and identified the most promising scores. For included articles, (1) validity data were extracted, (2) quality of reporting was assessed using the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis checklist (TRIPOD), and (3) quality was assessed using the Prediction Model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). To guide the assessment of the validity data, standardized cutoffs were employed, and an explicit definition of what we required to determine a score was sufficiently validated. RESULTS: Our searches identified 8541 results, of which 1779 were excluded as duplicates. After title and abstract screening, 6670 references were excluded. Following full-text screening and snowballing, 32 articles, including 31 scores, were included. The most frequently assessed scores were the modified Tal score and the Wang Bronchiolitis Severity Score; none of the scores were found to be sufficiently validated according to our definition. The reporting and/or design of all the included studies was poor. The best validated score was the Bronchiolitis Score of Sant Joan de Déu, and a number of other promising scores were identified. CONCLUSIONS: No scores were found to be sufficiently validated. Further work is warranted to validate the existing scores, ideally in much larger datasets.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções Respiratórias / Bronquiolite / Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Child / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Infect Dis Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções Respiratórias / Bronquiolite / Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Child / Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Infect Dis Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido