The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Clinical Significance of Positive Blood Cultures: A Comprehensive Analysis of 500 Episodes of Bacteremia and Fungemia in Adults. II. Clinical Observations, with Special Reference to Factors Influencing Prognosis
Abstract
Among 500 patients with bacteremia and fungemia, total mortality was 42%; about half of all deaths were attributable directly to infection. Mortality increased with age, but deaths unrelated to infection itself were responsible in part for this increase. Mortality was 2.6% among obstetric-gynecologic patients, 42% among medical patients, 49% among surgical patients, and 60% among transplant patients. The risk of death was especially high with enterococcal, facultative gram-negative, fungal, polymicrobial, or hospital-acquired sepsis; in the presence of shock, leukopenia, absolute granulocytopenia, or defined predisposing conditions (neoplasia, cirrhosis, and combinations of factors such as surgery and renal failure); and with a primary infected focus in the respiratory tract, the skin, a surgical wound, an abscess, or an unknown site. Body temperature was inversely related to mortality. Survival was increased by the use of appropriate antibiotics and, where applicable, additional therapeutic maneuvers (e.g., drainage). Multivariate analysis defined seven variables that independently influenced outcome: microorganism, blood pressure, body temperature, primary focus of infection, place of acquisition of infection, age, and predisposing factors. Although some adverse prognostic factors are not amenable to intervention, prevention of nosocomial bacteremia and fungemia and early reversal of hypotension may reduce the death rate from sepsis.
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
Cited by
Wisplinghoff, H., Bischoff, T., Tallent, S. M., Seifert, H., Wenzel, R. P., & Edmond, M. B. (2004) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/421946 · Cited by 4,496
Biological basis of the behavior of sick animals
Hart, B. L. (1988) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0149-7634(88)80004-6 · Cited by 2,223
Treating Patients with Severe Sepsis
Wheeler, A. P., & Bernard, G. R. (1999) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199901213400307 · Cited by 992
Has antifungal susceptibility testing come of age
Rex, J. H., & Pfaller, M. A. (2002) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/342384 · Cited by 361
Bacteremia Due to Acinetobacter baumannii: Epidemiology, Clinical Findings, and Prognostic Features
Cisneros, J. M., Reyes, M. J., Pachon, J., Becerril, B., Caballero, F. J., Garcia Garmendia, J. L., Ortiz, C., & Cobacho, A. R. (1996) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/clinids/22.6.1026 · Cited by 342
Metadata
- Authors
- Weinstein, M. P., Murphy, J. R., Reller, L. B., & Lichtenstein, K. A.
- Venue
- Clinical Infectious Diseases
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1983-01-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 54-70
- ISSN
- 1058-4838 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-6591
- OpenAlex
- W2146853812
- Cited by
- 472
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.14
- 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: The Clinical Significance of Positive Blood Cultures: A Comprehensive Analysis of 500 Episodes of Bacteremia and Fungemia in Adults. II. Clinical Observations, with Special Reference to Factors Influencing Prognosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/clinids/5.1.54
- The paper
- Weinstein, M. P., Murphy, J. R., Reller, L. B., & Lichtenstein, K. A. (1983). The Clinical Significance of Positive Blood Cultures: A Comprehensive Analysis of 500 Episodes of Bacteremia and Fungemia in Adults. II. Clinical Observations, with Special Reference to Factors Influencing Prognosis. Clinical Infectious Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinids/5.1.54
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.