MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association of Follow-up Blood Cultures With Mortality in Patients With Gram-Negative Bloodstream Infections

2022· review· en· W4296688406 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joshua T. Thaden, Sarah Cantrell, Michael Dagher, Yazhong Tao, Felicia Ruffin, Stacey A. Maskarinec, Stacy Goins, Matthew R. Sinclair, Joshua B. Parsons, Emily M. Eichenberger, Vance G. Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyHazard ratioConfoundingInternal medicineEpidemiologyRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisBlood cultureMEDLINEConfidence intervalAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Obtaining follow-up blood cultures (FUBCs) in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection (BSI) is standard practice, although its utility in patients with gram-negative bacterial BSI (GN-BSI) is unclear. Objective: To examine whether obtaining FUBCs is associated with decreased mortality (key question [KQ] 1) and whether positive vs negative FUBCs are associated with increased mortality (KQ2). Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and gray literature were searched from inception to March 11, 2022. Study Selection: Two investigators used predefined eligibility criteria to independently screen titles, abstracts, and relevant full texts. Randomized clinical trials or observational studies that matched or statistically adjusted for differences in, at minimum, level of acute illness between patients in the intervention (eg, FUBCs obtained) and control (eg, FUBCs not obtained) groups were included in primary analyses. Articles published in languages other than English were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data abstraction and quality assessments were performed by one investigator and verified by a second investigator. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects models. The study followed the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality before hospital discharge or up to 30 days from the index blood culture. Results: From 3495 studies, 15 were included (all nonrandomized). In the 5 studies (n = 4378 patients) that met criteria for the KQ1 primary analysis, obtaining FUBCs was associated with decreased mortality (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45-0.71). For KQ2, 2 studies met criteria for the primary analysis (ie, matched or statistically adjusted for differences in patients with positive vs negative FUBCs), so an exploratory meta-analysis of all 9 studies that investigated KQ2 (n = 3243 patients) was performed. Positive FUBCs were associated with increased mortality relative to negative blood cultures (odds ratio, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.54-3.34). Limitations of the literature included a lack of randomized studies and few patient subgroup analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, obtaining FUBCs in patients with GN-BSI was associated with decreased mortality. The benefit of FUBCs may stem from identification of patients with positive FUBCs, which was a poor prognostic marker.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.103
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.103
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207