Dataset Information

Diagnostic value of symptoms for pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infection in a primary care setting.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To evaluate the diagnostic value of symptoms used by daycares and schools to screen children and adolescents for SARS-CoV-2 infection, we analyzed data from a primary care setting.

Methods

This cohort study included all patients ≤17 years old who were evaluated at Providence Community Health Centers (PCHC; Providence, U.S.), for COVID-19 symptoms and/or exposure, and received SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing between March-June 2020. Participants were identified from PCHC electronic medical records. For three age groups- 0-4, 5-11, and 12-17 years-we estimated the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of individual symptoms and three symptom combinations: a case definition published by the Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH), and two novel combinations generated by different statistical approaches to maximize sensitivity, specificity, and AUC. We evaluated symptom combinations both with and without consideration of COVID-19 exposure. Myalgia, headache, sore throat, abdominal pain, nausea, anosmia, and ageusia were not assessed in 0-4 year-olds due to the lower reliability of these symptoms in this group.

Results

Of 555 participants, 217 (39.1%) were SARS-CoV-2-infected. Fever was more common among 0-4 years-olds (p = 0.002); older children more frequently reported fatigue (p = 0.02). In children ≥5 years old, anosmia or ageusia had 94-98% specificity. In all ages, exposure history most accurately predicted infection. With respect to individual symptoms, cough most accurately predicted infection in <5 year-olds (AUC 0.69) and 12-17 year-olds (AUC 0.62), while headache was most accurate in 5-11 year-olds (AUC 0.62). In combination with exposure history, the novel symptom combinations generated statistically to maximize test characteristics had sensitivity >95% but specificity <30%. No symptom or symptom combination had AUC ≥0.70.

Conclusions

Anosmia or ageusia in children ≥5 years old should raise providers' index of suspicion for COVID-19. However, our overall findings underscore the limited diagnostic value of symptoms.

SUBMITTER: Weng CH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8668089 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAssigning meaningful probabilities of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk presents a diagnostic challenge across the continuum of care.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and clinically validate an adaptable, personalized diagnostic model to assist clinicians in ruling in and ruling out COVID-19 in potential patients. We compared the diagnostic performance of probabilistic, graphical, and machine learning models against a previously published benchmark model.MethodsWe integrated patient symptoms and test data using machine learning and Bayesian inference to quantify individual patient risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We trained models with 100,000 simulated patient profiles based on 13 symptoms and estimated local prevalence, imaging, and molecular diagnostic performance from published reports. We tested these models with consecutive patients who presented with a COVID-19-compatible illness at the University of California San Diego Medical Center over the course of 14 days starting in March 2020.ResultsWe included 55 consecutive patients with fever (n=43, 78%) or cough (n=42, 77%) presenting for ambulatory (n=11, 20%) or hospital care (n=44, 80%). In total, 51% (n=28) were female and 49% (n=27) were aged <60 years. Common comorbidities included diabetes (n=12, 22%), hypertension (n=15, 27%), cancer (n=9, 16%), and cardiovascular disease (n=7, 13%). Of these, 69% (n=38) were confirmed via reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) to be positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, and 20% (n=11) had repeated negative nucleic acid testing and an alternate diagnosis. Bayesian inference network, distance metric learning, and ensemble models discriminated between patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and alternate diagnoses with sensitivities of 81.6%-84.2%, specificities of 58.8%-70.6%, and accuracies of 61.4%-71.8%. After integrating imaging and laboratory test statistics with the predictions of the Bayesian inference network, changes in diagnostic uncertainty at each step in the simulated clinical evaluation process were highly sensitive to location, symptom, and diagnostic test choices.ConclusionsDecision support models that incorporate symptoms and available test results can help providers diagnose SARS-CoV-2 infection in real-world settings.