Septic Shock Attributed to Candida Infection: Importance of Empiric Therapy and Source Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Delayed treatment of candidemia has previously been shown to be an important determinant of patient outcome. However, septic shock attributed to Candida infection and its determinants of outcome have not been previously evaluated in a large patient population. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with septic shock and blood cultures positive for Candida species was conducted at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, a 1250-bed urban teaching hospital (January 2002-December 2010). RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-four consecutive patients with septic shock and a positive blood culture for Candida species were identified. Death during hospitalization occurred among 155 (63.5%) patients. The hospital mortality rate for patients having adequate source control and antifungal therapy administered within 24 hours of the onset of shock was 52.8% (n = 142), compared to a mortality rate of 97.6% (n = 82) in patients who did not have these goals attained (P < .001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that delayed antifungal treatment (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 33.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.65-118.04; P = .005) and failure to achieve timely source control (AOR, 77.40; 95% CI, 21.52-278.38; P = .001) were independently associated with a greater risk of hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of death is exceptionally high among patients with septic shock attributed to Candida infection. Efforts aimed at timely source control and antifungal treatment are likely to be associated with improved clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".