Risk for hospital-acquired pneumonia from proton pump inhibitor or sucralfate in intensive care units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increased risk of pneumonia from proton pump inhibitors (PPI) has been addressed in recent studies. This study aimed to investigate the risk of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) in critically ill patients receiving PPI or sucralfate. This retrospective observational cohort study analyzed patients who were prescribed with PPIs or sucralfate for stress ulcer prophylaxis in intensive care units (ICU). A propensity score and other risk factors were used to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for the two groups. The final cohort comprised 388 patients with 302 patients on PPI and 86 patients on sucralfate therapies. HAP developed in 63 patients (20.86%) on PPI, and 8 patients (9.30%) on sucralfate (adjusted OR 3.37, 95% CI 1.35-8.45, p-value 0.009). The enrolled patients on PPI therapy with an APACHE II score ＞ 13 (adjusted OR 3.70,95% CI 1.04-13.10, p-value 0.043), or those on PPI therapy with an ICU stay of more than 8 days (adjusted OR 9.04, 95% CI 1.94-42.06, p-value 0.005) had the highest risk of developing HAP. Patients in medical ICU treated with PPIs had a higher risk of developing HAP than those treated with sucralfate. For the ICU patients requiring stress ulcer prophylaxis, sucralfate can be considered as a priority treatment. The risk and benefit of PPI treatment should be evaluated for patients who may have a longer ICU stay or have a high APACHE II score.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".