Association of preadmission metformin use and mortality in patients with sepsis and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have reported that preadmission metformin users had lower mortality than non-metformin users in patients with sepsis and diabetes mellitus; however, these results are still controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published observational cohort data to determine the association between preadmission metformin use and mortality in septic adult patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from their inception to September 30, 2018. Cohort studies that evaluated the use of metformin in septic adult patients with diabetes mellitus were included. The quality of outcomes was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The inverse variance method with random effects modelling was used to calculate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: Five observational cohort studies (1282 patients) that were all judged as having a low risk of bias were included. In this meta-analysis, metformin use was associated with a significantly lower mortality rate (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43-0.79, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicated an association between metformin use prior to admission and lower mortality in septic adult patients with diabetes mellitus. This finding suggested that the possible effect of metformin should be evaluated in future clinical trials.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 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".