Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35967847›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2022

Clinical characteristics and risk factors associated with ICU-acquired infections in sepsis: A retrospective cohort study.

Yajun He, Jiqian Xu, Xiaopu Shang, Xiangzhi Fang, Chenggang Gao, Deyi Sun, Lu Yao, Ting Zhou, Shangwen Pan, Xiaojing Zou and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yajun HeDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Jiqian XuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Xiaopu ShangDepartment of Information Management, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China.
Xiangzhi FangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Chenggang GaoDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Deyi SunDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Lu YaoDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Ting ZhouDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Shangwen PanDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Xiaojing ZouDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Huaqing ShuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Xiaobo YangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
You ShangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Union Hospital · CNHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CNBeijing Jiaotong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infection is a common cause of poor prognosis of sepsis in the ICU. However, sepsis-associated ICU-acquired infections have not been fully characterized. The study aims to assess the risk factors and develop a model that predicts the risk of ICU-acquired infections in patients with sepsis. Methods: We retrieved data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC) IV database. Patients were randomly divided into training and validation cohorts at a 7:3 ratio. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify independent risk factors that could predict ICU-acquired infection. We also assessed its discrimination and calibration abilities and compared them with classical score systems. Results: Of 16,808 included septic patients, 2,871 (17.1%) developed ICU-acquired infection. These patients with ICU-acquired infection had a 17.7% ICU mortality and 31.8% in-hospital mortality and showed a continued rise in mortality from 28 to 100 days after ICU admission. The classical Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Score (SIRS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), Oxford Acute Severity of Illness Score (OASIS), Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score (LODS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and Acute Physiology Score III (APS III) scores were associated with ICU-acquired infection, and cerebrovascular insufficiency, Gram-negative bacteria, surgical ICU, tracheostomy, central venous catheter, urinary catheter, mechanical ventilation, red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, LODS score and anticoagulant therapy were independent predictors of developing ICU-acquired infection in septic patients. The nomogram on the basis of these independent predictors showed good calibration and discrimination in both the derivation (AUROC = 0.737; 95% CI, 0.725-0.749) and validation (AUROC = 0.751; 95% CI, 0.734-0.769) populations and was superior to that of SIRS, SOFA, OASIS, SAPS II, LODS, CCI, and APS III models. Conclusions: ICU-acquired infections increase the likelihood of septic mortality. The individualized prognostic model on the basis of the nomogram could accurately predict ICU-acquired infection and optimize management or tailored therapy.

Indexed as

Organ Dysfunction ScoresSepsisHumansIntensive Care UnitsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsICU-acquired infectionMIMIC databasepredictionrisk factorssepsis

Identifiers

PMID35967847
PMCPMC9366915
OpenAlexW4288084673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.