The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Outcome of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia According to Compliance with Recommendations of Infectious Diseases Specialists: Experience with 244 Patients
Abstract
To determine whether recommendations of infectious diseases specialists affect outcome for patients, we evaluated 244 hospitalized patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. We offered our management recommendations to each patient's physicians and then assessed the clinical outcome for both patients for whom our consultative advice was followed and those for whom our advice was not heeded. All patients were followed up for 12 weeks after their first positive blood culture. Our management advice was followed for 112 patients (45.9%) and partially or completely ignored for 132 patients (54.1%). Patients for whom our recommendations were followed were more likely to be cured of their S. aureus infection and less likely to relapse (P < .01), despite having significantly more metastatic infections (P < .01) at the outset of therapy, than were those for whom our recommendations were not followed. Failure to follow recommendations to remove an infected intravascular device was the most important risk for treatment failure. After controlling for other factors, logistic regression analysis revealed that patients whose intravascular device was not removed were 6.5 times more likely to relapse or die of their infection than were those whose device was removed. Our findings suggest that patient-specific management advice by infectious diseases consultants can improve the clinical outcome for patients with S. aureus bacteremia.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Daniel, W. G., Mügge, A., Martin, R. P., Lindert, O., Hausmann, D., Nonnast-Daniel, B., Laas, J., & Lichtlen, P. R. (1991) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199103213241203 · Cited by 723
Cited by
Tong, S. Y. C., Davis, J. S., Eichenberger, E., Holland, T. L., & Fowler, V. G. (2015) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00134-14 · Cited by 5,192
Self-citationMermel, L. A., Allon, M., Bouza, E., Craven, D. E., Flynn, P., O'Grady, N. P., Raad, I. I., Rijnders, B. J. A., Sherertz, R. J., & Warren, D. K. (2009) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/599376 · Cited by 3,638
Freifeld, A. G., Bow, E. J., Sepkowitz, K. A., Boeckh, M. J., Ito, J. I., Mullen, C. A., Raad, I. I., Rolston, K. V., Young, J.-A. H., & Wingard, J. R. (2011) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/cir073 · Cited by 3,463
Guidelines for the management of intravascular catheter-related infections
Mermel, L. A., Farr, B. M., Sherertz, R. J., Raad, I. I., O'Grady, N., Harris, J. S., & Craven, D. E. (2001) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/320001 · Cited by 1,449
ESCMID∗ guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of biofilm infections 2014
Høiby, N., Bjarnsholt, T., Moser, C., Bassi, G. L., Coenye, T., Donelli, G., Hall-Stoodley, L., Holá, V., Imbert, C., Kirketerp-Møller, K., et al. (2015) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2014.10.024 · Cited by 726
Metadata
- Authors
- Fowler, V. G., Sanders, L. L., Sexton, D. J., Kong, L., Marr, K. A., Gopal, A. K., Gottlieb, G., McClelland, R. S., & Corey, G. R.
- Venue
- Clinical Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-09-01
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 478-486
- ISSN
- 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-6591
- OpenAlex
- W2088177863
- Cited by
- 441
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.15
- 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: Outcome of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia According to Compliance with Recommendations of Infectious Diseases Specialists: Experience with 244 Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/514686
- The paper
- Fowler, V. G., Sanders, L. L., Sexton, D. J., Kong, L., Marr, K. A., Gopal, A. K., Gottlieb, G., McClelland, R. S., & Corey, G. R. (1998). Outcome of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia According to Compliance with Recommendations of Infectious Diseases Specialists: Experience with 244 Patients. Clinical Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1086/514686
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.