| Study characteristics |
| Patient sampling |
All infants admitted to the NICU for sepsis evaluation. |
| Patient characteristics and setting |
All infants admitted to the NICU for sepsis evaluation. No participant demographics available. |
| Index tests |
Broad‐range conventional PCR and DNA dot‐blot hybridization. |
| Target condition and reference standard(s) |
Neonatal sepsis and blood culture. |
| Flow and timing |
Index test and reference standard were performed simultaneously. |
| Comparative |
|
| Notes |
This was a feasibility study and blood sample for PCR was from discarded or unused sample sent to evaluate CBCs. It was not clear whether blood drawn for CBC was also done with the same aseptic technique as blood culture. Study period not mentioned. |
| Methodological quality |
| Item |
Authors' judgement |
Risk of bias |
Applicability concerns |
| DOMAIN 1: Patient Selection |
| Was a consecutive or random sample of patients enrolled? |
Yes |
|
|
| Was a case‐control design avoided? |
Yes |
|
|
| Did the study avoid inappropriate exclusions? |
Yes |
|
|
| |
|
Low |
Unclear |
| DOMAIN 2: Index Test All tests |
| Were the index test results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the reference standard? |
Unclear |
|
|
| If a threshold was used, was it pre‐specified? |
Yes |
|
|
| |
|
Low |
High |
| DOMAIN 3: Reference Standard |
| Is the reference standards likely to correctly classify the target condition? |
Yes |
|
|
| Were the reference standard results interpreted without knowledge of the results of the index tests? |
Unclear |
|
|
| |
|
Low |
Low |
| DOMAIN 4: Flow and Timing |
| Was there an appropriate interval between index test and reference standard? |
Yes |
|
|
| Did all patients receive the same reference standard? |
Yes |
|
|
| Were all patients included in the analysis? |
Yes |
|
|
| |
|
Unclear |
|
