ArticleMycoses2021
Modified Pitt bacteremia score for predicting mortality in patients with candidaemia: A multicentre seven-year retrospective study conducted in Japan.
Article in Mycoses, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical management, antifungal susceptibility, and predictors of 28-day mortality in Candidozyma auris candidemia: A single-center cohort study.Medical mycology · 2026Article
- Effect of polymerase chain reaction-based antifungal stewardship on candidemia management in small- and medium-sized hospitals.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2026Article
- Clinical impact of altered gut microbiota and metabolite profiles on mortality in patients with candidemia: a prospective observational pilot cohort study.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2026Observational
- Analysis of the association of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, MPV-to-platelet ratio, and clinical risk factors for mortality in ICU patients with candidemia: a 10-year retrospective analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Observational
- Article
- Pitt candidaemia score as an assessment tool for mortality in patients with candidaemia caused byJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeveral severity indexes have been reported for critically ill patients. The Pitt bacteremia score (PBS) is commonly used to predict the risk of mortality in patients with bacteraemia.
objectivesTo develop a scoring system for predicting mortality in candidaemia patients.
methodsMedical records at five Japanese tertiary hospitals were reviewed. Factors associated with mortality were analysed using logistic regression modelling. The discriminatory power of scoring models was evaluated by assessing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).
resultsIn total, 422 candidaemia patients were included. Higher PBS, dialysis and retainment of central venous catheter were independent risk factors for all-cause 30-day mortality. However, among the five PBS components, fever was not associated with mortality; therefore, we developed a modified version of the PBS (mPBS) by replacing fever with dialysis. AUC for PBS and mPBS were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-0.80) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.71-0.82), respectively. The increase in predictive ability of mPBS for 30-day mortality was statistically significant as assessed by NRI (0.24, 95% CI: 0.01-0.46, p = .04) and IRI (0.04, 95% CI: 0.02-0.06, p = .0008). When patients were stratified by mPBS into low (scores 0-3), moderate (4-7) and high risk (≥8), there were significant differences among the survival curves (p < .0001, log-rank test), and 30-day mortality rates were 13.8% (40/290), 36.8% (28/76) and 69.4% (34/49), respectively.
conclusionsmPBS can be a useful tool for predicting mortality in candidaemia patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.