Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21191800›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2012

Formal adult infectious disease specialist consultations in the outpatient setting at a comprehensive cancer center (1998-2008): diverse and impactful.

G Pongas, G Hamilos, K V Rolston, Dimitrios P Kontoyiannis

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 47% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Inpatient infectious disease consultations requested by surgeons at a comprehensive cancer center.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

G PongasDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Infection Control and Employee Health, The University of Texas, Unit 1460, MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
G Hamilos
K V Rolston
Dimitrios P Kontoyiannis
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe literature on the impact of infectious disease (ID) consulations in the outpatient treatment of cancer is scarce.

methodsThe medical records of consecutive adult patients with cancer formally evaluated by two board-certified ID specialists in an outpatient setting at our institution over a 10-year period (1998-2008) were reviewed retrospectively. The patients' demographics, referring departments, purposes for consultation, ID specialist recommendations, and overall impact of consultations on outcome were analyzed.

resultsWe identified 598 patients who underwent ID specialist consultations. Most of them had solid tumors (53%), predominantly breast cancer, whereas non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was the most common hematologic malignancy. Almost half of the patients (45%) had active malignancies, but few of them were severely neutropenic (8%) or had been receiving high doses of corticosteroids (17%). The most frequent requests for consultation were culture or serologic test (15%), and treatment of cellulitis and/or surgical wound infections (14%). Of 337 isolated pathogens, the most prevalent were methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (13%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (8%), as well as atypical mycobacteria (16%) and Aspergillus species (11%). ID specialists provided alternative diagnoses in 53% of the cases, including identification of a different infection (46%), a noninfectious etiology (29%), colonization (16%), and drug-related toxic effects (9%). Overall, we deemed the contribution of the ID specialist to be significant in 62% of the consultations.

conclusionsID specialists contribute significantly to the outpatient care of individuals with cancer.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAmbulatory CareCancer Care FacilitiesCommunicable DiseasesHumansInfectious Disease MedicineMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsProfessional RoleReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21191800
OpenAlexW1985867869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.