Abstract
Background Risk stratification tools for childhood pneumonia have been proposed to improve identification of children at highest risk of death, particularly in low-resource settings. However, their added value over the WHO Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) criteria and danger signs remains uncertain.
Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-country randomised controlled trial of children without HIV hospitalised with pneumonia in Mozambique, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. We evaluated the performance of five published risk scores alongside WHO IMCI severity classification and danger signs. Discrimination for (1) in-hospital mortality, (2) 28-day mortality, and (3) 28-day readmission or death was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Comparative performance and clinical utility were examined.
Results Of the 1010 participants, 18 (1.8%) died in hospital, 22 (2.2%) died in hospital or in the 7 days post-discharge, and 63 (6.2%) died or were readmitted by day 28. Univariate case-fatality rates were highest for variables associated with malnutrition, convulsions, and hypoxaemia.
All risk scores demonstrated moderate discrimination for in-hospital and in-hospital+7-day mortality (AUC range approximately 0.75–0.84), with no meaningful differences between models, and performed similarly to the WHO danger signs and IMCI severity classification. In contrast, all approaches performed poorly in predicting 28-day readmission or death (AUC approximately 0.54–0.58). No risk score consistently outperformed simple clinical criteria.
Conclusions In this multi-country dataset, we found no evidence that published paediatric pneumonia risk scores meaningfully outperform WHO IMCI-based clinical assessment for predicting mortality. The relatively small number of mortality events limits precision, and modest differences cannot be excluded. These findings suggest that, in low-resource settings, strengthening implementation of existing WHO clinical criteria may be more effective than adopting more complex prediction tools.
What is already known on this topic
Several clinical risk scores have been developed to predict mortality in childhood pneumonia, with some validation studies in low-resource settings, although head-to-head comparisons across multiple risk stratification tools and settings are limited.
WHO IMCI criteria are widely known and commonly used in many low-resource settings, but their comparative performance against newer risk stratification tools and for post-discharge outcomes is uncertain.
What this study adds
In a multicountry African cohort, published paediatric pneumonia risk scores showed similar performance to the WHO IMCI criteria for predicting mortality.
No consistent advantage of more complex tools over the WHO IMCI criteria was observed.
All approaches showed limited ability to predict 28-day readmission or death.
How this study might affect research, practice, or policy
These findings suggest that improving implementation of the WHO IMCI may be more important than introducing more complex risk scores in low-resource settings.
The limited performance of all approaches for post-discharge outcomes highlights the need to consider additional factors beyond admission clinical severity.
Competing Interest Statement
Sandoz provided oral amoxicillin and co-amoxiclav fixed dose combination dispersible tablets but had no role in the design, conductor analysis of the trial. The amoxicillin 200 mg/clavulanic acid 28.5 mg 7/1 novel dispersible tablet used in the trial was included in the 2023 WHO Essential Medicines List for Children following a submission from Sandoz. MS Chaired the 2023 WHO Expert Committee on Selection and Use of Essential Medicines.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was not required for this secondary analysis. For the main PediCAP trial, local ethical approval was sought and obtained in each country. We also obtained hospital or Provincial Health Authority approvals, in addition to regulatory approvals for the clinical trial (Mozambique: Comite Nacional de Bioethica Para a Saude (IRB00002657) REF 323/CNBS/22 , South Africa: University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical) REF 190913B, Uganda: Makarere University Research Ethics Committee REF 2019-162, Zambia: University of Zambia Biomedical Research Ethics Committee REF 328-2019, Zimbabwe: Joint Research Ethics Committee for the University of Zimbabwe, College of Health Sciences and Parirenyatwa Group of Hospitals REF 221/19).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors





