MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560952688 · doi:10.1089/sur.2016.184

Age and Its Impact on Outcomes with Intra-Abdominal Infection

2016· article· en· W2560952688 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Infections · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Age has been shown to play a significant role in the etiology of complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), but the correlation between age and outcomes after therapy was not investigated in the Study to Optimize Peritoneal Infection Therapy (STOP-IT) trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were obtained by post hoc analysis of the STOP-IT trial database. Patients were stratified by age <65 or ≥65 years. Primary outcomes were surgical site infection (SSI), recurrent IAI (recIAI), and death. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of outcomes. RESULTS: There were 398 subjects <65 and 120 ≥ 65 years. Overall baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. The site of infection was similar between groups except: Colon or rectum (48.3% vs. 29.9%, p = 0.0002) and biliary tree (16.7% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.02), which were more common in the older group, whereas small intestine (6.7% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.008) and appendix (4.2% vs.17.1%, p = 0.0004) were more common in the younger group. Among the primary outcomes, only death was significantly different between the age groups and was more prevalent in the ≥65 years group (4 [3.3%] vs. 1 [0.3%], p = 0.01). Surgical site infection (9.2% vs. 7.3%, p = 0.50), recIAI (15.8% vs. 14.4%, p = 0.69), and a composite outcome (26.7% vs. 20.4%, p = 0.14) were statistically similar between the age groups, and this remained true when controlling for other co-variables. Multivariable analyses did not reveal age as an independent predictor of the composite or individual outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients with a more advanced age demonstrated variable sources of infection relative to the younger cohort, yet received similar treatments. Patient age was not an independent predictor of the undesired cIAI outcomes. These findings suggest that advanced age itself does not play a significant role in predicting these adverse outcomes for cIAIs and does not necessitate an altered treatment tactic.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.310 · 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