MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Female Sex and Mortality in Patients With Gram-Negative Bacteremia

2025· article· en· W4416186629 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Priscilla La, Rachel E. Korn, P. Cox, Divyam Goel, Jean Francois Jabbour, Annette C. Westgeest, Stacey A. Maskarinec, Roberta Monardo, Joshua B. Parsons, Felicia Ruffin, Merel M. C. Lambregts, Yazhong Tao, Sarah Cantrell, Vance G. Fowler, Joshua T. Thaden

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthUniversiteit LeidenPfizerLeids Universitair Medisch CentrumJanssen PharmaceuticalsAstraZeneca
KeywordsBacteremiaFemale sexEpidemiologyMortality rateRisk of mortalitySex characteristicsMEDLINEStatistical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Female sex has been identified as a risk factor for mortality in Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection (SA-BSI). It is unknown whether this association extends to bloodstream infections with other bacterial species. Objective: To investigate whether female sex is associated with increased mortality risk among patients with gram-negative bloodstream infection (GN-BSI). Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to January 8, 2025. Study Selection: Study inclusion criteria were randomized or observational studies assessing adults with GN-BSI that included at least 100 patients and reported mortality at or before 90 days following GN-BSI, with mortality stratified by sex and, when applicable, by gram-negative bacterial species. Studies with polymicrobial GN-BSI were excluded. For inclusion in the primary analysis, studies must have stratified or statistically adjusted for confounding variables between female and male patients with GN-BSI. A secondary analysis included studies that reported sex-stratified unadjusted mortality. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One reviewer conducted extraction and quality assessment, which was verified by a second reviewer. Risk of bias and quality were assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Mortality data were combined as odds ratios (ORs). The study followed the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline. Main Outcome and Measures: Mortality at or before 90 days following GN-BSI, stratified by sex. Results: From 9752 studies retrieved, 25 (16 350 patients; 4017 female [25%], 12 333 male [75%]) were included in the primary analysis. Female patients with GN-BSI did not have increased risk of mortality relative to male patients (pooled OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.81-1.17]). No publication bias was identified. Subset analyses based on medical comorbidities, timing of mortality end point, bacterial species group, antibiotic resistance phenotype, and publication date did not reveal a set of patients with differences in sex-stratified mortality. A total of 321 studies (147 810 patients) that reported unadjusted mortality were included in a secondary analysis. In this analysis, female sex was associated with decreased risk of mortality (pooled OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.86-0.94]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, female patients with GN-BSI were not at higher risk than male patients of mortality after statistical adjustment. GN-BSI and SA-BSI thus differ in sex-specific mortality outcomes, highlighting the need for further research into the immunological, pathophysiological, and clinical management factors that may be associated with sex disparities in SA-BSI but not in GN-BSI.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.289 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207