Yeah

... because some of the children were more unwell, essentially.

They basically merged those two datasets, and with that they got kind of round 2,749 infants that were less than 60 days, and their kind of prevalence of a serious bacterial infection within that was about somewhere between 10, 10 to 12%.

Um, and the majority of those were UTIs.

In the Maffici study, there was only about kind of half of them that had a urinalysis done, but kind of, um, there was a higher percentage of those in the Swedish study that were able to get the f- the same, essentially the same dataset.

So as we said, we were looking at performance against the PCARN tool and then kind of how CRP could be substituted.

Applied the PCARN rule to that Swedish cohort because they had, um, procalcitonin values that they were able to do sort of like for like.

A number needed to observe sort of thing.