ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2023
Evaluation of a Previously Developed Predictive Model for Infective Endocarditis in 320 Patients Presenting with Fever at 4 Centers in Japan Between January 2018 and December 2020.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A new diagnostic prediction model for infective endocarditis based on the 2023 duke-international society for cardiovascular infectious disease criteria: a multicenter observational study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Observational
- Development of a Machine Learning-Based Prediction Model to Differentiate Infectious and Non-Infectious Diseases in Patients with Undiagnosed Fever: A Single Hospital-Based Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Prediction Models of Infective Endocarditis Usable Ahead of Performing Blood Cultures: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND In our previous single-center study, we developed an infective endocarditis (IE) prediction model among patients with undiagnosed fever (UF) based on 5 factors that can be obtained on admission: ambulance transfer, presence of cardiac murmur or pleural effusion, blood neutrophil percentage, and platelet count. The present study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the prediction model for IE in 320 patients presenting with fever at 4 university hospitals in Japan from January 2018 to December 2020. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients aged ≥20 years admitted to 4 hospitals with I-330 (IE) or R-50-9 (UF) according to the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 were enrolled. More than 2 physicians at each hospital reviewed the patient diagnoses using the modified Duke criteria, allocating "definite IE" to IE group (n=119) and "non-definite IE" to UF group (n=201). Five factors on admission were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. The discriminative ability and calibration of the model were evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC) and the shrinkage coefficient, respectively. RESULTS A total of 320 patients were enrolled. The odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) were as follows: ambulance transfer 1.81 (0.91-3.55); cardiac murmur 13.13 (6.69-27.36); pleural effusion 2.34 (0.62-2.42); blood neutrophil percentage 1.09 (1.06-1.14); and platelet count 0.96 (0.93-0.99). The AUC was 0.783 (0.732-0.834) with a shrinkage coefficient of 0.961. CONCLUSIONS The IE prediction model is useful to estimate the probability of IE immediately after admission for fever in patients aged ≥20 years.
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.