The Relation Between Hyperglycemia and Outcomes in 2,471 Patients Admitted to the Hospital With Community-Acquired Pneumonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether hyperglycemia at the time of presentation was associated with outcomes in patients admitted to non-intensive care settings with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study of consecutive patients admitted to six hospitals between 15 November 2000 and 14 November 2002. RESULTS: Of the 2,471 patients in this study (median age 75 years), 279 (11%) had serum glucose at presentation >11 mmol/l: 178 of the 401 patients (44%) with a prior diagnosis of diabetes and 101 of the 2,070 patients (5%) without a history of diabetes. Of patients hospitalized with CAP, 9% died and 23% suffered an in-hospital complication. Compared with those with values < or =11 mmol/l, patients with an admission glucose >11 mmol/l had an increased risk of death (13 vs. 9%, P = 0.03) and in-hospital complications (29 vs. 22%, P = 0.01). Compared with those patients with admission glucose < or =6.1 mmol/l, the mortality risk was 73% higher (95% CI 12-168%) and the in-hospital complication risk was 52% higher (12-108%) in patients with admission glucose >11 mmol/l. Even after adjustment for factors in the Pneumonia Severity Index, hyperglycemia on admission remained significantly associated with subsequent adverse outcomes: for each 1-mmol/l increase, risk of in-hospital complications increased 3% (0.2-6%). CONCLUSIONS: Hyperglycemia on admission is independently associated with adverse outcomes in patients with CAP, with the increased risks evident at lower glucose levels than previously reported.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".