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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.783
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.025
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