ReviewDer Internist2009
[Supportive and adjunctive sepsis therapy].
Review in Der Internist, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- [Supportive and adjunctive sepsis therapy].Der Internist · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Severe sepsis and septic shock have an increasing incidence but an unchanged mortality. It has been demonstrated that the time until the start of supportive therapy affects the progress of multiorgan failure and patient outcome. Early goal-directed therapy guided by central venous oxygen saturation is associated with a significant reduction in mortality, as is the use of lung-protective mechanical ventilation and recombinant activated protein C (rhAPC) in eligible patients. The use of starches for volume resuscitation, low-dose dopamine and hydrocortison as well as an intensive insulin protocol for restoration of euglycemia is not recommended. The German Competence Network Sepsis (SepNet) is currently studying further relevant questions.
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.