Evaluation of the host immune response assay SeptiCyte RAPID for potential triage of COVID-19 patients.

Tools for the evaluation of COVID-19 severity would help clinicians with triage decisions, especially the decision whether to admit to ICU. The aim of this study was to evaluate SeptiCyte RAPID, a host immune response assay (Immunexpress, Seattle USA) as a triaging tool for COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization and potentially ICU care. SeptiCyte RAPID employs a host gene expression signature consisting of the ratio of expression levels of two immune related mRNAs, PLA2G7 and PLAC8, measured from whole blood samples. Blood samples from 146 adult SARS-CoV-2 (+) patients were collected within 48 h of hospital admission in PAXgene blood RNA tubes at Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain, between July 28th and December 1st, 2020. Data on demographics, vital signs, clinical chemistry parameters, radiology, interventions, and SeptiCyte RAPID were collected and analyzed with bioinformatics methods. The performance of SeptiCyte RAPID for COVID-19 severity assessment and ICU admission was evaluated, relative to the comparator of retrospective clinical assessment by the Hospital del Mar clinical care team. In conclusion, SeptiCyte RAPID was able to stratify COVID-19 cases according to clinical severity: critical vs. mild (AUC = 0.93, p < 0.0001), critical vs. moderate (AUC = 0.77, p = 0.002), severe vs. mild (AUC = 0.85, p = 0.0003), severe vs. moderate (AUC = 0.63, p = 0.05). This discrimination was significantly better (by AUC or p-value) than could be achieved by CRP, lactate, creatine, IL-6, or D-dimer. Some of the critical or severe cases had "early" blood draws (before ICU admission; n = 33). For these cases, when compared to moderate and mild cases not in ICU (n = 37), SeptiCyte RAPID had AUC = 0.78 (p = 0.00012). In conclusion, SeptiCyte RAPID was able to stratify COVID-19 cases according to clinical severity as defined by the WHO COVID-19 Clinical Management Living Guidance of January 25th, 2021. Measurements taken early (before a patient is considered for ICU admission) suggest that high SeptiScores could aid in predicting the need for later ICU admission.

Octava evaluación de test editados en España: una experiencia participativa / Eighth Review Of Tests Published In Spain: A Participative Experience

La Comisión de Test del Consejo General de la Psicología en España promueve anualmente la revisión de la calidad de diferentes test publicados. Este trabajo tiene un doble objetivo: a) presentar los resultados de la octava edición y b) considerar la aportación dela universidad en dicho proceso. En esta edición participaron 10 especialistas, 332 estudiantes y siete profesores, adaptándose el protocolo estándar de revisión al formato aprendizaje-servicio. En cuanto a los resultados, la calidad de los 11 test evaluados fue adecuada (promedio de 3,9 puntos en una escala 1-5) y similar a años anteriores (r = 0,90). El desarrollo y la baremación fueron puntos fuertes, mientras que se proponen mejoras en otros aspectos. El aprendizaje-servicio contribuyó a la diversificación de voces en el proceso observándose una calidad similar entre los informes del estudiantado y los emitidos por especialistas y un grado de acuerdo esperable (r = 0,67) entre ellos. Concluimos que el presente proyecto ha permitido identificar la oportunidad de profundizaren el uso de lenguaje compartido para fortalecer la comunicación entre las casas editoriales, la comisión promotora del modelo español de revisión de test, y las personas usuarias de los test, particularmente si se trata de principiantes. (AU)

Every year, the Test Commission of the Spanish Psychological Association promotes the assessment of the test quality of several published tests. The aim of the present study is two-fold: a) to present results for the eighth review, and b) to consider the contribution of the universities in this process. Ten experts, 332 students, and seven professors participated in this edition and the standardprotocol for review was aligned towards a service-learning format. For the 11 tests assessed, results showed an adequate quality(average of 3.9 points on a 1-5 rating scale) similar to previous years (r = .90). The strengths were test development andstandardization, and a number of proposals for improving other sections were suggested. The service-learning approach contributed to the diversification of voices in the process with students’ and experts’ reports showing similar quality and an expectedlevel of agreement (r = .67). We conclude that this project has helped to identify the opportunity to further deepen the use of shared language in order to strengthen the communication between the test publishers, the promoters of the Spanish model of testassessment, and the test users, especially in the case of beginners. (AU)

[Fair use of tests in health sciences]. / Uso equitativo de tests en ciencias de la salud.

Standardized measurement instruments (tests) have become an essential tool in health sciences. The concept of equity in the development, adaptation and administration of psychometric tests was first introduced in "Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing" published in 1999 by the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education. Despite its importance, this concept has been scarcely used in epidemiology and public health. Consequently, this methodological note aims to explain the concept of equity in testing and to provide tools and indications to detect and solve their inequitable use.

Uso equitativo de tests en ciencias de la salud / Fair use of tests in health sciences

Los instrumentos de medida estandarizados (tests) se han convertido en una herramienta imprescindible en las ciencias de la salud. En los estándares para pruebas educativas y psicológicas publicados en 1999 por la American Educational Research Association, la American Psychological Association y el National Council on Measurement in Education se introduce el concepto de equidad en el desarrollo, la adaptación y la administración de los tests psicométricos. A pesar de su innegable relevancia, este concepto ha sido poco utilizado en el mundo de la salud pública y la epidemiología. Por ello, la presente nota metodológica tiene como objetivo explicar el concepto de equidad en los tests y dar herramientas e indicaciones para detectar y solventar su uso no equitativo (AU)

Standardized measurement instruments (tests) have become an essential tool in health sciences. The concept of equity in the development, adaptation and administration of psychometric tests was first introduced in «Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing» published in 1999 by the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education. Despite its importance, this concept has been scarcely used in epidemiology and public health. Consequently, this methodological note aims to explain the concept of equity in testing and to provide tools and indications to detect and solve their inequitable use (AU)