2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2013.10.064
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Empirical validation of Polish guidelines for the management of acute streptococcal pharyngitis in children

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The positive predictive value when using a Modified Centor Score of 4 was reported as 48% by Mazur et al (21). In our study, a Modified Centor Score of 4 had a positive predictive value of 46.4%.…”
Section: Comparison With Existing Literaturesupporting
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The positive predictive value when using a Modified Centor Score of 4 was reported as 48% by Mazur et al (21). In our study, a Modified Centor Score of 4 had a positive predictive value of 46.4%.…”
Section: Comparison With Existing Literaturesupporting
confidence: 52%
“…Our score had a positive predictive value of 62.5%, which seems to be better than that of the Modified Centor Score. The importance of a negative likelihood ratio has been stated as an important factor for use as a clinical criterion (6,21). A negative likelihood ratio of under 0.2 is considered useful.…”
Section: Comparison With Existing Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The sensitivity and specificity of this test in the study being discussed here exceeded the values provided by stewart et al in the meta-analysis relevant to 1216 adults with pharyngitis [10]. it is worth adding that a Polish study, which provides similar observations on the adequacy of radT in the case of children, has been published recently [11]. what is significant is that the application of radT in making therapeutic decisions not only makes it possible to use antibiotics justifiably (epidemiological aspect, limiting side effects), but is also cost-effective.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 49%