MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414023025 · doi:10.3390/jof11090656

The Prognostic Value of (1→3)-β-D-Glucan in COVID-19 Patients with and Without Secondary Fungal Disease

2025· article· en· W4414023025 on OpenAlexaff
Udari Welagedara, Jessica S. Price, Raquel Posso, Matthijs Backx, P. Lewis White

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fungi · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Value (mathematics)DiseaseMicrobiologyGlucan2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineBiologyInternal medicineVirologyMathematicsInfectious disease (medical specialty)StatisticsBiochemistryOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: -D-Glucan (BDG) in serum may be indicative of invasive fungal disease (IFD), but even without IFD, elevated BDG can be associated with adverse patient outcomes. METHODS: COVID-19-infected patients (n = 125) who were screened for IFD with fungal biomarkers were evaluated to assess the prognostic value of BDG. BDG was correlated with patients' mortality, considering the influences of IFD and anti-fungal therapy (AFT). RESULTS: = 0.0001). In patients without IFD but with BDG > 31 pg/mL, mortality dropped to 50% when AFT was administered. In patients with BDG > 31 pg/mL and neither IFD nor AFT, the average probability of death was 3.38-fold greater. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated serum BDG is associated with significant mortality in COVID-19-infected patients without IFD, irrespective of AFT. A BDG-associated proinflammatory response might be driving the high mortality. BDG serves as a prognostic marker in COVID-19-infected patients with or without IFD. When BDG is very low (≤31 pg/mL) the likelihood of death remains consistent with the background mortality rates for COVID-19 within the ICU.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of FungiSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207