MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036985442 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e3182a66b9b

Macrolides and Mortality in Critically Ill Patients With Community-Acquired Pneumonia

2013· review· en· W2036985442 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Wendy Sligl, Leyla Asadi, Dean T. Eurich, Lisa Tjosvold, Thomas J. Marrie, Sumit R. Majumdar

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineCommunity-acquired pneumoniaInternal medicinePneumoniaObservational studyRandomized controlled trialGuidelineConfoundingMortality rateRelative riskConfidence intervalIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Some studies suggest better outcomes with macrolide therapy for critically ill patients with community-acquired pneumonia. To further explore this, we performed a systematic review of studies with mortality endpoints that compared macrolide therapy with other regimens in critically ill patients with community-acquired pneumonia. DATA SOURCES: Studies were identified via electronic databases, grey literature, and conference proceedings through May 2013. STUDY SELECTION: Using prespecified criteria, two reviewers selected studies; studies of outpatients and hospitalized noncritically ill patients were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers extracted data and evaluated bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effects models were used to generate pooled risk ratios and evaluate heterogeneity (I). DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-eight observational studies (no randomized control trials) were included. Average age ranged from 58 to 78 years and 14-49% were women. In our primary analysis of 9,850 patients, macrolide use was associated with statistically significant lower mortality compared with nonmacrolides (21% [846 of 4,036 patients] vs 24% [1,369 of 5,814]; risk ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70-0.97; p = 0.02; I = 63%). When macrolide monotherapy was excluded, the macrolide mortality benefit was maintained (21% [737 of 3,447 patients] vs 23% [1,245 of 5,425]; risk ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-1.00; p = 0.05; I = 60%). When broadly guideline-concordant regimens were compared, there was a trend to improved mortality and heterogeneity was reduced (20% [511 of 2,561 patients] mortality with beta-lactam/macrolide therapy vs 23% [386 of 1,680] with beta-lactam/fluoroquinolone; risk ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.67-1.03; p = 0.09; I = 25%). When adjusted risk estimates were pooled from eight studies, macrolide therapy was still associated with a significant reduction in mortality (risk ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.96; p = 0.02; I = 57%). CONCLUSIONS: In observational studies of almost 10,000 critically ill patients with community-acquired pneumonia, macrolide use was associated with a significant 18% relative (3% absolute) reduction in mortality compared with nonmacrolide therapies. After pooling data from studies that provided adjusted risk estimates, an even larger mortality reduction was observed. These results suggest that macrolides be considered first-line combination treatment in critically ill patients with community-acquired pneumonia and support current guidelines.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations194
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207