Bacterial infections in anorexia nervosa: Delayed recognition increases complications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We compared the natural history of bacterial infection in patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) with controls, and assessed which of a range of patient characteristics were associated with infection, fever response, and the rate of infectious complications in AN patients. METHOD: The charts of 311 consecutive hospital admissions of AN patients were reviewed. Patients who had a bacterial infection while in the hospital were compared with the AN patients who did not have an infection, with respect to a range of demographic and disease variables. Fever response and infection complication rate also were evaluated in AN patients with a bacterial infection and in nonanorectic control subjects admitted with a bacterial infection. RESULTS: AN patients with a bacterial infection showed a reduced fever response, were often difficult to diagnose because of fewer signs and symptoms, and infection became more frequent with increasing patient age. DISCUSSION: A reduction in fever response and the signs and symptoms of infection significantly delayed diagnosis in AN patients and increased the complication rate from bacterial infection. We recommend that an increased index of suspicion and an early complete blood count and bacteriologic cultures be adopted for the investigation of bacterial infection in AN patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".