Evidence Hub

Predicting paediatric pneumonia severity in the emergency department: a multinational prospective cohort study of the Pediatric Emergency Research Network

Todd A. Florin, D. Tancredi, L. Ambroggio, F. Babl, S. Dalziel, M. Eckerle, S. Mintegi, Mark I. Neuman et al.

The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 2025

2,222 participants · 17 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification tools for paediatric community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in well-resourced settings are scarce. We prospectively developed models to predict CAP severity within a multinational cohort of paediatric emergency departments (EDs). Our primary objective was to develop a risk prediction model to discriminate between mild CAP and moderate or severe CAP to assist clinicians in determining the need for hospitalisation.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study was conducted from Feb 6, 2019, to June 30, 2021, at 73 EDs in 14 countries. Children aged 3 months to 24 h, positive-pressure ventilation, septic shock, vasoactive infusions, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or death) occurring within 7 days of the ED visit. Models were developed using logistic regression with bootstrap validation.

FINDINGS

Of 2222 children in the overall study population (1103 [49·7%] female, 1119 [50·3%] male; median age 3 years [IQR 1-5]), 1290 (58·1%) had mild CAP, 812 (36·5%) moderate, and 120 (5·4%) severe. Primary analyses were performed in 1901 patients with complete data: 1011 (53·2%) mild, 772 (40·6%) moderate, and 118 (6·2%) severe CAP. Congestion or rhinorrhoea was negatively associated with moderate or severe CAP (adjusted odds ratio 0·59 [95% CI 0·46-0·76]), while abdominal pain (1·52 [1·17-1·97]), refusal to drink (1·57 [1·24-2·00]), antibiotics before ED visit (1·64 [1·29-2·10]), chest retractions (2·86 [2·24-3·65]), respiratory rate above the 95th percentile for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 2,222 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free