Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35672068›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Point-of-care diagnostic technology in paediatric ambulatory care: a qualitative interview study of English clinicians and stakeholders.

Meriel Elizabeth Raymond, Chris Bird, Oliver van Hecke, Margaret Glogowska, Gail Hayward

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Transformative impact of point-of-care testing in critical care.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Implementing in-vitro diagnostic point-of-care tests in community health care: how can we make this work?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Meriel Elizabeth RaymondNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK meriel.raymond@phc.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-0442-9280
Chris BirdNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Oliver van HeckeNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Margaret GlogowskaNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Gail HaywardNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0852-627X
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Point-of-care (POC) tests have the potential to improve paediatric healthcare. However, both the development and evaluation of POC technology have almost solely been focused on adults. We aimed to explore frontline clinicians' and stakeholders' current experience of POC diagnostic technology in children in England; and to identify areas of unmet need. DESIGN, SETTING AND

participantsQualitative semistructured telephone interviews were carried out with purposively sampled participants from clinical paediatric ambulatory care and charity, industry and policymaking stakeholders. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

resultsWe interviewed 19 clinicians and 8 stakeholders. The main perceived benefits of POC tests and technologies were that they aided early decision-making and could be convenient and empowering when used independently by patients and families. Clinicians and stakeholders wanted more POC tests to be available for use in clinical practice. Most recognised that play and reward are important components of successful POC tests for children. Clinicians wanted tests to give them answers, which would result in a change in their clinical management. Detecting acute serious illness, notably distinguishing viral and bacterial infection, was perceived to be an area where tests could add value. POC tests were thought to be particularly useful for children presenting atypically, where diagnosis was more challenging, such as those less able to communicate, and for rare serious diseases. Many participants felt they could be useful in managing chronic disease.

conclusionsThis exploratory study found that clinicians and stakeholders supported the use of diagnostic POC technology in paediatric ambulatory care settings in England. Some existing tests are not fit for purpose and could be refined. Industry should be encouraged to develop new child-friendly tests tackling areas of unmet need, guided by the preferred characteristics of those working on the ground.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsPoint-of-Care TestingAmbulatory CareChildHumansQualitative ResearchTechnologymolecular diagnosticspaediatric a&e and ambulatory careprimary carequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID35672068
PMCPMC9174781
OpenAlexW4282940798

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.