MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072393428 · doi:10.1086/599343

Safety and Efficacy of Corticosteroids for the Treatment of Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2009· review· en· W2072393428 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Infectious Diseases · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdrenal Hormones and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSeptic shockMeta-analysisSuperinfectionCochrane LibraryIncidence (geometry)Relative riskRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineConfidence intervalClinical endpointMortality rateShock (circulatory)SurgerySepsisImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Septic shock is common and results in significant morbidity and mortality. Adjunctive treatment with corticosteroids is common, but definitive data are lacking. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid therapy among patients with septic shock. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized trials and observational studies published from January 1993 through December 2008. Studies were selected if they included adults with septic shock, discussed treatment with intravenous corticosteroids, and reported at least 1 outcome of interest (e.g., mortality, shock reversal, or incidence of superinfection). Two reviewers independently agreed on eligibility, assessed methodologic quality, and abstracted data. RESULTS: Pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for 28-day all-cause mortality, shock reversal at 7 days, and incidence of superinfection with use of random-effects models. Analyses, stratified by adrenal responsiveness, were prespecified. Eight studies (6 randomized trials) involving a total of 1876 patients were selected. Overall, corticosteroid therapy did not result in a statistically significant difference in mortality (42.2% [369 of 875 patients] vs. 38.4% [384 of 1001]; RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.84-1.18). A statistically significant difference in the incidence of shock reversal at 7 days was observed between patients who received corticosteroids and those who did not (64.9% [314 of 484 patients] vs. 47.5% [228 of 480]; RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.22-1.64), with similar point estimates for both corticotropin stimulation test responders and nonresponders. No statistically significant difference was found in the incidence of superinfection between patients treated with corticosteroids and patients not treated with corticosteroids (25.3% [114 of 450 patients] vs. 22.7% [100 of 441]; RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.86-1.42). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with septic shock, corticosteroid therapy appears to be safe but does not reduce 28-day all-cause mortality rates. It does, however, significantly reduce the incidence of vasopressor-dependent shock, which may be a clinically worthwhile goal.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.340 · 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