MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314905126 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e31826764cd

The Difference Between Critical Care Initiation Anion Gap and Prehospital Admission Anion Gap is Predictive of Mortality in Critical Illness*

2012· article· en· W2314905126 on OpenAlexaff
Michael S. Lipnick, Andrea Braun, Joyce Ting-Wai Cheung, Fiona K. Gibbons, Kenneth B. Christopher

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal function and acid-base balance
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalAnion gapQuartileLogistic regressionIntensive careInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that the delta anion gap defined as difference between critical care initiation standard anion gap and prehospital admission standard anion gap is associated with all cause mortality in the critically ill. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: Two hundred nine medical and surgical intensive care beds in two hospitals in Boston, MA. PATIENTS: Eighteen thousand nine hundred eighty-five patients, age ≥18 yrs, who received critical care between 1997 and 2007. MEASUREMENTS: The exposure of interest was delta anion gap and categorized a priori as <0, 0-5, 5-10, and >10 mEq/L. Logistic regression examined death by days 30, 90, and 365 postcritical care initiation and in-hospital mortality. Adjusted odds ratios were estimated by multivariable logistic regression models. The discrimination of delta anion gap for 30-day mortality was evaluated using receiver operator characteristic curves performed for a subset of patients with all laboratory data required to analyze the data via physical chemical principles (n = 664). INTERVENTIONS: None. RESULTS: Delta anion gap was a particularly strong predictor of 30-day mortality with a significant risk gradient across delta anion gap quartiles following multivariable adjustment: delta anion gap <0 mEq/L odds ratio 0.75 (95% confidence interval 0.67-0.81; p < 0.0001); delta anion gap 5-10 mEq/L odds ratio 1.56 (95% confidence interval 1.35-1.81; p < 0.0001); delta anion gap >10 mEq/L odds ratio 2.18 (95% confidence interval 1.76-2.71; p < 0.0001); and all relative to patients with delta anion gap 0-5 mEq/L. Similar significant robust associations post multivariable adjustments are seen with death by days 90 and 365 as well as in-hospital mortality. Correcting for albumin or limiting the cohort to patients with standard anion gap at critical care initiation of 10-18 mEq/L did not materially change the delta anion gap-mortality association. Delta anion gap has similarly moderate discriminative ability for 30-day mortality in comparison to standard base excess and strong ion gap. CONCLUSION: An increase in standard anion gap at critical care initiation relative to prehospital admission standard anion gap is a predictor of the risk of all cause patient mortality in the critically ill.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicRenal function and acid-base balanceFrench-language works237,207