MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387602646 · doi:10.7717/peerj.16241

Prognostic value of serum phosphate levels in sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4387602646 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shengfeng Wei, Yunhan Li, Chunhua Zhang, Xiangjian Guo, Xinmeng Liang, Yanmei Huang, Fan Zhang, Jihong Li, Qiangqiang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalSepsisMeta-analysisInternal medicineRelative riskCochrane LibrarySubgroup analysisGastroenterologySeptic shockIntensive care unit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background There remain controversies over the conclusion of different serum phosphate levels as prognostic predictors of sepsis patients. As such, this study investigated the association between different serum phosphate and the prognosis of sepsis. Methods Data from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically retrieved from the inception of databases to June 1, 2023 and independently screened and extracted by two authors. Binary variables in the study were estimated as relative risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), and continuous variables were estimated as mean and standard deviation. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was employed to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed for all outcomes to explore the sources of heterogeneity. Results Ten studies were included in this study including 38,320 patients with sepsis or septic shock. Against normal serum phosphate levels, a high serum phosphate level was associated with an elevated all-cause mortality risk (RR = 1.46; 95% CI [1.22–1.74]; P = 0.000) and prolonged Intensive Care Unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) (WMD = 0.63; 95% CI [0.27–0.98]; P = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the in-hospital LOS (WMD = 0.22; 95% CI [−0.61–1.05]; P = 0.609). A low serum phosphate level was not significantly associated with the all-cause mortality risk (RR = 0.97; 95% CI [0.86–1.09]; P = 0.588), ICU LOS (WMD = −0.23; 95% CI [−0.75–0.29]; P = 0.394) and in-hospital LOS (WMD = −0.62; 95% CI [−1.72–0.49]; P = 0.274). Conclusion Sepsis patients with high serum phosphate levels before therapeutic interventions were associated with a significant increase in the all-cause mortality risk, prolonged ICU LOS, and no significant difference in in-hospital LOS. Sepsis patients with low serum phosphate levels before interventions may have a reduced risk of all-cause mortality, shorter ICU LOS, and in-hospital LOS, but the results were not statistically significant.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.033
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.199
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicParathyroid Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207