Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,310

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prognosis and Outcomes of Patients With Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Meta-analysis

Fine, Michael J.·1996·JAMA

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the medical literature on the prognosis and outcomes of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE literature search of English-language articles involving human subjects and manual reviews of article bibliographies were used to identify studies of prognosis in CAP. STUDY SELECTION: Review of 4573 citations revealed 122 articles (127 unique study cohorts) that reported medical outcomes in adults with CAP. DATA EXTRACTION: Qualitative assessments of studies' patient populations, designs, and patient outcomes were performed. Summary univariate odds ratios (ORs) and rate differences (RDs) and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed to estimate a summary effect size for the association of prognostic factors and mortality. DATA SYNTHESIS: The overall mortality for the 33,148 patients in all 127 study cohorts was 13.7%, ranging from 5.1% for the 2097 hospitalized and ambulatory patients (in six study cohorts) to 36.5% for the 788 intensive care unit patients (in 13 cohorts). Mortality varied by pneumonia etiology, ranging from less than 2% to greater than 30%. Eleven prognostic factors were significantly associated with mortality using both summary ORs and RDs: male sex (OR = 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.4), pleuritic chest pain (OR = 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.8), hypothermia (OR = 5.0; 95% CI, 2.4 to 10.4), systolic hypotension (OR = 4.8; 95% CI, 2.8 to 8.3), tachypnea (OR = 2.9; 95% CI, 1.7 to 4.9), diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5), neoplastic disease (OR = 2.8; 95% CI, 2.4 to 3.1), neurologic disease (OR = 4.6; 95% CI, 2.3 to 8.9), bacteremia (OR = 2.8; 95% CI, 2.3 to 3.6), leukopenia (OR = 2.5, 95% CI, 1.6 to 3.7), and multilobar radiographic pulmonary infiltrate (OR = 3.1; 95% CI, 1.9 to 5.1). Assessments of other clinically relevant medical outcomes such as morbid complications (41 cohorts), symptoms resolution (seven cohorts), return to work or usual activities (five cohorts), or functional status (one cohort) were infrequently performed. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality for patients hospitalized with CAP was high and was associated with characteristics of the study cohort, pneumonia etiology, and a variety of prognostic factors. Generalization of these findings to all patients with CAP should be made with caution because of insufficient published information on medical outcomes other than mortality in ambulatory patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1996.03530260048030

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 60 references

Cited by

See all 1,310

Metadata

Authors
Fine, M. J.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1996-01-10
Volume
275
Issue
2
Pages
134
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2037712857
Cited by
1,310
References
60
FWCI
30.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prognosis and Outcomes of Patients With Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1996.03530260048030
The paper
Fine, M. J. (1996). Prognosis and Outcomes of Patients With Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Meta-analysis. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1996.03530260048030

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.