The morbidity and mortality of pediatric oncology patients presenting to the intensive care unit with septic shock
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with an underlying diagnosis of malignancy are at high risk for developing serious infections. Previous studies, although very limited in number, suggest a particularly poor outcome for these patients if admitted to an intensive care unit with septic shock. PROCEDURE: A review of all oncology patients admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) at a tertiary care Children's Hospital over an 11-year period with a diagnosis of septic shock was performed. Patients were age and gender-matched with non-oncology patients also admitted to the PICU with septic shock during the same time period. Mortality and morbidity rates were compared, and risk factors for poor outcome were examined. RESULTS: The charts of 69 oncology patients and 69 control patients were reviewed. Mortality rate at PICU discharge was not significantly different between the two groups (15.9% in the oncology group, versus 11.6% in the control group, P = 0.607). Organ dysfunction was higher in the oncology group (P = 0.005), although length of PICU stay was shorter (P = 0.036). There was no difference in ventilator days or vasopressor use. CONCLUSION: This review found that the survival of oncology patients admitted to the PICU with septic shock was not significantly different from control patients, and was significantly higher than previous reports. Aggressive management of these children is warranted as their long term prognosis may be much more favorable than originally thought.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".