MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2434130898 · doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1360-z

Increased body mass index and adjusted mortality in ICU patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2016· review· en· W2434130898 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dominique J. Pepper, Junfeng Sun, Judith A. Welsh, Xizhong Cui, Anthony F. Suffredini, Peter Q. Eichacker

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNIH Clinical CenterNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineOverweightUnderweightBody mass indexSeptic shockSepsisOdds ratioInternal medicineCochrane LibraryCohort studyIntensive careMeta-analysisIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: At least 25 % of adults admitted to intensive care units (ICU) in the United States have an overweight, obese or morbidly obese body mass index (BMI). The effect of BMI on adjusted mortality in adults requiring ICU treatment for sepsis is unclear. We performed a systematic review of adjusted all-cause mortality for underweight, overweight, obese and morbidly obese BMIs relative to normal BMI for adults admitted to the ICU with sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock. METHOD: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE electronic databases were searched through November 18, 2015, without language restrictions. We included studies that reported multivariate regression analyses for all-cause mortality using standard BMI categories for adults admitted to the ICU for sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock. Articles were selected by consensus among multiple reviewers. Electronic database searches yielded 10,312 articles, of which six were eligible. Data were extracted by one reviewer and then reviewed by three independent reviewers. For the meta-analyses performed, the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of mortality were combined using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies. RESULTS: Four retrospective (n = 6609 patients) and two prospective (n = 556) studies met inclusion criteria. Compared to normal BMI, across five studies each, overweight or obese BMIs reduced the adjusted odds ratio (95 % CI) of mortality [aOR] [0.83 (0.75, 0.91) p < 0.001 and 0.82 (0.67, 0.99) p = 0.04, respectively] with low or moderate heterogeneity (I(2) = 15.7 %, p = 0.31 and I(2) = 53.0 %, p = 0.07, respectively). Across three studies each, morbidly obese BMI and underweight BMI did not alter aOR [0.90 (0.59, 1.39), p = 0.64; I(2) = 43.3 %, p = 0.17; and 1.24 (0.79, 1.95), p = 0.35; I(2) = 15.6 %, p = 0.31 respectively]. Only one study clearly defined how and when height and weight measurements were calculated. Site of underlying infection and illness severity may have favored overweight and obese BMIs. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first meta-analysis to show that overweight or obese BMIs reduce adjusted mortality in adults admitted to the ICU with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock. More rigorous studies that address these limitations are needed to clarify the impact of BMI on sepsis ICU outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews 10.15124/ CRD42014010556 . Registered on July 11, 2014.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations248
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207