A standardized protocol using clinical adjudication to define true infection status in patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected infections and/or sepsis

Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2024 Sep;110(1):116382. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116382. Epub 2024 May 31.

Abstract

In absence of a "gold standard", a standardized clinical adjudication process was developed for a registrational trial of a transcriptomic host response (HR) test. Two physicians independently reviewed clinical data to adjudicate presence and source of bacterial and viral infections in emergency department patients. Discordant cases were resolved by a third physician. Agreement among 955 cases was 74.1% (708/955) for bacterial, 75.6% (722/955) for viral infections, and 71.2% (680/955) overall. Most discordances were minor (85.2%; 409/480) versus moderate (11.7%; 56/480) or complete (3.3%; 16/480). Concordance levels were lowest for bacterial skin and soft tissue infections (8.2%) and for viral respiratory tract infections (4.5%). This robust adjudication process can be used to evaluate HR tests and other diagnostics by regulatory agencies and for educating clinicians, laboratorians, and clinical researchers. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04094818. SUMMARY: Without a gold standard for evaluating host response tests, clinical adjudication is a robust reference standard that is essential to determine the true infection status in diagnostic registrational clinical studies.

Keywords: Adjudication; Bacterial; Clinical; Viral.

MeSH terms

  • Bacterial Infections* / diagnosis
  • Emergency Service, Hospital*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Sepsis* / diagnosis
  • Virus Diseases / diagnosis

Associated data

  • ClinicalTrials.gov/NCT04094818