MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217620169 · doi:10.1164/rccm.202106-1350oc

Association of ICU Admission and Outcomes in Sepsis and Acute Respiratory Failure

2021· article· en· W3217620169 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsSepsisMechanical ventilationRespiratory failureConfidence intervalRetrospective cohort studyCohort studyCohortSeverity of illness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale Many decisions to admit patients to the ICU are not grounded in evidence regarding who benefits from such triage, straining ICU capacity and limiting its cost-effectiveness. Objectives To measure the benefits of ICU admission for patients with sepsis or acute respiratory failure. Methods At 27 United States hospitals across two health systems from 2013 to 2018, we performed a retrospective cohort study using two-stage instrumental variable quantile regression with a strong instrument (hospital capacity strain) governing ICU versus ward admission among high-acuity patients (i.e., laboratory-based acute physiology score v2 ⩾ 100) with sepsis and/or acute respiratory failure who did not require mechanical ventilation or vasopressors in the emergency department. Measurements and Main Results Among patients with sepsis (n = 90,150), admission to the ICU was associated with a 1.32-day longer hospital length of stay (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01–1.63; P < 0.001) (when treating deaths as equivalent to long lengths of stay) and higher in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.13–1.88; P = 0.004). Among patients with respiratory failure (n = 45,339), admission to the ICU was associated with a 0.82-day shorter hospital length of stay (95% CI, –1.17 to –0.46; P < 0.001) and reduced in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57–0.96; P = 0.04). In sensitivity analyses of length of stay, excluding, ignoring, or censoring death, results were similar in sepsis but not in respiratory failure. In subgroup analyses, harms of ICU admission for patients with sepsis were concentrated among older patients and those with fewer comorbidities, and the benefits of ICU admission for patients with respiratory failure were concentrated among older patients, highest-acuity patients, and those with more comorbidities. Conclusions Among high-acuity patients with sepsis who did not require life support in the emergency department, initial admission to the ward, compared with the ICU, was associated with shorter length of stay and improved survival, whereas among patients with acute respiratory failure, triage to the ICU compared with the ward was associated with improved survival.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations42
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207