MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288791953 · doi:10.1177/22925503211034830

Predictors of Mortality in Patients With Necrotizing Fasciitis: A Literature Review and Multivariate Analysis

2021· review· en· W4288791953 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsey Kjaldgaard, Nora Cristall, Justin Gawaziuk, Zeenib Kohja, Sarvesh Logsetty

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic Surgery · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStreptococcal Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFasciitisMultivariate analysisInternal medicineDyslipidemiaDiseasePopulationRetrospective cohort studyReferralUnivariate analysisMortality rateCreatininePediatricsSurgeryFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) is a life-threatening infectious disease that can result in significant morbidity and mortality. Previously identified factors have not been verified in a large population. The objective of this study is to further examine the relationship of patient factors in NF mortality. Methods: This study is a retrospective review on patients ≥18 years old diagnosed with NF at the provincial referral centres from 2004 to 2016. The following data were examined: demographics, comorbidities, laboratory values, length of stay, and inhospital mortality. Results: Three hundred forty patients satisfied the inclusion criteria: 297 survived and were discharged, 43 died in hospital. In multivariate analysis, a prognostic model for NF mortality identified age >60 years, elevated creatinine, abnormal blood platelets, and group A β-hemolytic Streptococcus (GABS) infection. Conclusions: Multiple factors were associated with mortality in NF. The strongest univariate association with mortality was age >60 years. In addition, a history of hypertension and/or dyslipidemia, renal disease, and the presence of GABS contributed to a predictive model for inhospital NF mortality.

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)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic SurgerySame topicStreptococcal Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207