Corticosteroid Therapy in Critical Illness due to Seasonal and Pandemic Influenza
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Survey data suggest that Canadian intensivists administer corticosteroids to critically ill patients primarily in response to airway obstruction, perceived risk for adrenal insufficiency and hemodynamic instability. OBJECTIVE: To describe variables independently associated with systemic corticosteroid therapy during an influenza outbreak. METHODS: The present analysis was retrospective cohort study involving critically ill patients with influenza in two Canadian cities. Hospital records were reviewed for critically ill patients treated in the intensive care units (ICUs) of eight hospitals in Canada during the 2008 to 2009 and 2009 to 2010 influenza outbreaks. Abstracted data included demographic information, symptoms at disease onset, chronic comorbidities and baseline illness severity scores. Corticosteroid use data were extracted for every ICU day and expressed as hydrocortisone dose equivalent in mg. Multivariable regression models were constructed to identify variables independently associated with corticosteroid therapy in the ICU. RESULTS: The study cohort included 90 patients with a mean (± SD) age of 55.0 ± 17.3 years and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 19.8 ± 8.3. Patients in 2009 to 2010 were younger with more severe lung injury but similar exposure to corticosteroids. Overall, 54% of patients received corticosteroids at a mean daily dose of 343 ± 330 mg of hydrocortisone for 8.5 ± 4.8 days. Variables independently associated with corticosteroid therapy in the ICU were history of airway obstruction (OR 4.8 [95% CI 1.6 to 14.9]) and hemodynamic instability (OR 4.6 [95% CI 1.2 to 17.8]). CONCLUSION: Observational data revealed that hemodynamic instability and airway obstruction were associated with corticosteroid therapy in the critical care setting, similar to a recent survey of stated practice. Efforts to determine the effects of corticosteroids in the ICU for these specific clinical situations are warranted.
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".