Study of clinical course of organ dysfunction in intensive care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Multiple organ dysfunction is a common cause of death in intensive care units. We describe the daily course of multiple organ dysfunction measured by the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score in a population-based cohort of critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Adult multisystem intensive care units in the Calgary Health Region. PATIENTS: A total of 1,436 patients admitted from May 1, 2000 to April 30, 2001. MEASUREMENTS: Temporal change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. INTERVENTIONS: None; observational study. MAIN RESULTS: The mean age was 58 yrs (range, 14-100). The mean +/- sd intensive care unit admission Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 25 +/- 9. The median intensive care unit length of stay was 4 days (interquartile range, 2-8), and the median hospital length of stay was 15 days (interquartile range, 7-32). A total of 20.5% of patients were infected at admission, and 26.0% were immediately postoperative. Intensive care unit mortality was 27.0%, and hospital mortality was 35.1%. The daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was significantly higher in nonsurvivors than survivors. A population-averaged model determined a mean rate of change of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score to be -0.29 per day (95% confidence interval, -0.32 to -0.25) for survivors and -0.03 per day (95% confidence interval, -0.08 to 0.03) for nonsurvivors (overall regression, p <.0001). Patients with infection had higher admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores compared with patients without infection (difference, 1.8; p <.001), but a similar rate of daily change. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple organ dysfunction, does not follow a course of progressive and sequential failure. Evidence of differential daily change should further inform the use of organ failure scores as surrogate outcomes in clinical trials.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".