MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4252389453 · doi:10.3410/f.1158290.618551

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Interaction of vasopressin infusion, corticosteroid treatment, and mortality of septic shock.

2009· dataset· en· W4252389453 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John Augoustides, In‐Sung Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2009
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVasopressinSeptic shockMedicineNorepinephrineShock (circulatory)Clinical endpointCorticosteroidAnesthesiaResuscitationIntensive careRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineSepsisIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Vasopressin and corticosteroids are often added to support cardiovascular dysfunction in patients who have septic shock that is nonresponsive to fluid resuscitation and norepinephrine infusion. However, it is unknown whether vasopressin treatment interacts with corticosteroid treatment.DESIGN: Post hoc substudy of a multicenter randomized blinded controlled trial of vasopressin vs. norepinephrine in septic shock.SETTING: Twenty-seven Intensive Care Units in Canada, Australia, and the United States.PATIENTS: : Seven hundred and seventy-nine patients who had septic shock and were ongoing hypotension requiring at least 5 microg/min of norepinephrine infusion for 6 hours.INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to blinded vasopressin (0.01-0.03 units/min) or norepinephrine (5-15 microg/min) infusion added to open-label vasopressors. Corticosteroids were given according to clinical judgment at any time in the 28-day postrandomization period.MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was 28-day mortality. We tested for interaction between vasopressin treatment and corticosteroid treatment using logistic regression. Secondary end points were organ dysfunction, use of open-label vasopressors and vasopressin levels.MAIN RESULTS: There was a statistically significant interaction between vasopressin infusion and corticosteroid treatment (p = 0.008). In patients who had septic shock and were also treated with corticosteroids, vasopressin, compared to norepinephrine, was associated with significantly decreased mortality (35.9% vs. 44.7%, respectively, p = 0.03). In contrast, in patients who did not receive corticosteroids, vasopressin was associated with increased mortality compared with norepinephrine (33.7% vs. 21.3%, respectively, p = 0.06). In patients who received vasopressin infusion, use of corticosteroids significantly increased plasma vasopressin levels by 33% at 6 hours (p = 0.006) to 67% at 24 hours (p = 0.025) compared with patients who did not receive corticosteroids.CONCLUSIONS: There is a statistically significant interaction between vasopressin and corticosteroids. The combination of low-dose vasopressin and corticosteroids was associated with decreased mortality and organ dysfunction compared with norepinephrine and corticosteroids. PMID: 19237882

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0130.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2790.131

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature→Same topicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→