Fever at Time of Leukemia Diagnosis in Children: Predictor of Bloodstream Infection or Catheter Removal?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the incidence of fever at diagnosis in children with leukemia and determine if fever at diagnosis is a predictor of bloodstream infection (BSI) or central venous access device (CVAD) removal for infection either within the first 30 days or between 30 and 90 days after CVAD insertion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred fifty-one patients with acute leukemia (July 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020) who underwent a CVAD insertion within 2 weeks of diagnosis were included. Patient data included demographic characteristics, fever at diagnosis, CVAD type, antibiotics before and/or on the day of CVAD insertion, BSI incidence, BSI rates per 1,000 catheter days, and need for catheter removal after CVAD insertion within 30 days and between 30 and 90 days. RESULTS: Patients with fever at diagnosis had a significantly higher incidence of BSI within the first 30 days after CVAD insertion (17/23) than that among patients without fever (6/23) (P = .046) at diagnosis. No statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of BSI between 30 and 90 days after CVAD insertion between patients with fever (5/11) and those without fever at diagnosis (6/11) (P = .519). Fever at diagnosis was not a predictor of CVAD removal within 30 days (9 patients required CVAD removal; 7/9 had fever and 2/9 had no fever) (P = .181) or between 30 and 90 days (4 patients required CVAD removal; 1/4 had fever and 3/4 had no fever at diagnosis) (P = .343) after insertion. CONCLUSIONS: Fever at diagnosis in patients with leukemia is not a predictor of CVAD removal for infection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".