Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present report describes the outcomes of a cohort of patients with Candida induced septic shock. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of individuals who had at least one positive blood culture for Candida species ≥ 48 h after ICU admission. Data from patients that developed septic shock within 48 hr of the positive blood culture were compared to non-shock candidemic patients. Patients with a concomitant bacteremia and/or endocarditis were excluded. RESULTS: Fifteen patients with Candida induced septic shock were studied and compared to 35 candidemic patients without shock. Overall mortality was 76% (87 % among those who had shock). A high proportion of non-albicans Candida species causing fungemia (74%) was observed. All patients with shock were receiving antibiotics but not antifungal treatment at the time of shock development, eight were on parenteral nutrition, six on steroids and nine had a cancer history. High dose fluconazole was the most common initial treatment provided. Four patients died before receiving any antifungal treatment. Time in ICU before the development of candidemia was identified as a predictor of shock development (higher chance if fungemia developed < 7 days after ICU admission). CONCLUSIONS: Septic shock due to invasive candidiasis is a near fatal condition. No conventional risk factors were identified to predict shock development other than time (shorter) spent in ICU before the development of candidemia. We encourage clinicians to consider the initiation of appropriate empiric antifungal treatment in high-risk patients who develop septic shock while on antimicrobial treatment. KEYWORDS: Septic shock; Candidemia; Outcome; Predictor.
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 | 0.014 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".