Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42006505›Full record

ReviewEJIFCC2026

A Mini-Review of Point-of-Care C-Reactive Protein Testing in Sepsis in the Emergency Department.

Natasha Gomes Berlouis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EJIFCC, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Natasha Gomes BerlouisRoyal College of Physicians of Ireland, Frederick House, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Timely initiation of appropriate treatment of sepsis in the Emergency Department is crucial in a patient's prognosis. Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines suggest improved results in septic shock where antimicrobials are given within 1 hour of presentation. The recognition and treatment of critically ill patients could be expedited using different methods of point-of-care testing as opposed to centralised laboratory testing. C-reactive protein is utilised as a predictor for sepsis prognosis and should be interpreted in conjunction with patient clinical findings due to its low specificity and sensitivity. Some efficient and simple C-reactive protein point-of-care assay kits discussed include immunoturbidimetry, immunonephelometry, lateral flow assays and bioassays, which have advantages over laboratory-based methods, but still require further investigation. A useful tool such as a C-reactive protein point-of-care test could potentially enhance the operational performance of emergency care. Its use in optimizing antibiotic therapy to curb the rate of antimicrobial resistance and improve sepsis outcomes still requires validation. Septic shock management in the Emergency Department continues to be a challenging task and future verification studies and clinical guidelines on biomarkers for point-of-care testing are required to establish its reliability.

Indexed as

antibiotic stewardshipbiomarkersC-reactive proteindiagnosticsemergencyPOCTsepsis

Identifiers

PMID42006505
PMCPMC13088490

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.