ArticleClinical interventions in aging2022
The Prognostic Factors of Bloodstream Infection in Immunosuppressed Elderly Patients: A Retrospective, Single-center, Five-year Cohort Study.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a nomogram model for predicting MDRO infections in elderly ICU patients with pulmonary infections.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Article
- Low NAPR as a Novel Indicator for PredictingClinical interventions in aging · 2025Article
- Risk Factors and Mortality Outcomes in Elderly Patients With Bloodstream Infections: A Retrospective Analysis.Cureus · 2024Article
- Factors influencing bloodstream infections after immunosuppressive therapy in patients with aplastic anemia: a logistic regression analysis.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Development and Validation of a Prognostic Model for Multi-Drug-Resistant Non-Hospital-Acquired Bloodstream Infection.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Elderly patients with immunosuppressive status may have increased risk of mortality. At present, few studies have explored the clinical characteristics of the elderly immunosuppressed population with bloodstream infection. Our objectives were to evaluate the prognostic factors in immunosuppressed elderly patients with bloodstream infection. Methods: Three hundred and seventy-six elderly patients who were diagnosed with bloodstream infection in immunosuppressive status while receiving treatment in our hospital were selected from 2015 to 2019. The demographic data, underlying diseases, comorbidity, inducement, complications, pathogen sources, etiologies and the antibiotic therapy were analyzed between 90-day survival groups and 90-day mortality groups. The prognostic factors of 90-day mortality were evaluated by univariate logistic regression analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: The clinical characteristics of 376 immunosuppressed elderly people diagnosed with bloodstream infection were analyzed, and among those people about 111 were 90-day mortality. By univariate logistic regression analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis, we found ICU admission (OR: 2.052, 95%CI: 1.088-3.871, Conclusion: ICU admission, coronary heart disease, biliary infection, and the use of tigecycline were the independent prognostic risk factors of 90-day mortality in immunosuppressed elderly people, and the decrease in BMI was the protective factor, which would have the benefit of discriminating the prognostic factors in immunosuppressed elderly people with bloodstream infection.
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.