Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42454644›Full record

ArticleCritical care explorations2026

Likelihood of Bacterial Infection in Immunocompromised Patients Treated With IV Antibiotics for Possible Sepsis.

Simran Gupta, Lucia Millham, Laura DelloStritto, Anna A Agan, Cara McKenna, Chanu Rhee, Michael Klompas

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care explorations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Simran GuptaDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Lucia MillhamDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Laura DelloStrittoDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
Anna A AganDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
Cara McKennaDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
Chanu RheeDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Michael KlompasDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.

Funding

AHRQ HHS R01 HS027170NCEZID CDC HHS U54 CK000611
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesImmunocompromised patients with possible sepsis are typically treated immediately with empiric antibiotics given their high risk for poor outcomes. Clinical presentations of sepsis, however, are protean and many nonbacterial infections and noninfectious conditions can present similarly. We assessed the likelihood of bacterial infections in retrospect in immunocompromised vs. nonimmunocompromised patients treated empirically for sepsis. DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: We identified all adults treated for possible sepsis (blood culture draw, lactate measurement, and IV antibiotic administration) within 6 hours of emergency department (ED) arrival at nine hospitals between 2022 and 2024 and randomly selected 350 hospitalizations for structured medical record review, oversampling for immunocompromised status using administrative codes. Reviews were used to confirm immunocompromised status per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria and determine post hoc likelihoods of bacterial infection.

interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsOf the 350 patients, 186 (53.1%) were confirmed as immunocompromised and 164 (46.9%) as nonimmunocompromised. Immunocompromised patients more commonly presented with fevers, chills or rigors (66.0% vs. 32.0%, p < 0.001) and ED clinicians more often documented concern for sepsis (74% vs. 62%, p = 0.01) compared with nonimmunocompromised patients. Definite or probable bacterial infection was identified in 92 of 186 (49.5%) immunocompromised patients vs. 97 of 164 (59.1%) nonimmunocompromised patients (p = 0.07). Among immunocompromised patients without definite or probable bacterial infection, common alternative etiologies included viral or fungal infection, febrile neutropenia without clinical evidence of bacterial infection, progression of malignancy, and medication toxicity, whereas chronic heart or lung disease exacerbations, hypovolemia, and hypervolemia predominated among nonimmunocompromised patients.

conclusionsOnly about one-half of immunocompromised patients treated empirically for possible sepsis had definite or probable bacterial infection in retrospect, compared with approximately three-fifths in nonimmunocompromised patients. These findings underscore the complexity of sepsis diagnosis, particularly in immunocompromised patients, and highlight important differences in the conditions that mimic bacterial sepsis in immunocompromised vs. nonimmunocompromised hosts.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsImmunocompromised HostSepsisAdministration, IntravenousAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesAnti-Bacterial Agentsbacterial infectionimmunocompromised hostinfectionsepsis

Identifiers

PMID42454644
PMCPMC13375051

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.