ReviewWorld journal of experimental medicine2015
Are there new approaches for diagnosis, therapy guidance and outcome prediction of sepsis?
Review in World journal of experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Glioblastoma progression is hindered by melatonin-primed mesenchymal stromal cells through dynamic intracellular and extracellular reorganizations.Theranostics · 2025Article
- The application of metagenomics, radiomics and machine learning for diagnosis of sepsis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- A boosting inspired personalized threshold method for sepsis screening.Journal of applied statistics · 2021Article
- Observational
- Validation of two multiplex platforms to quantify circulating markers of inflammation and endothelial injury in severe infection.PloS one · 2017Article
- Heart-Rate Variability-More than Heart Beats?Frontiers in public health · 2017Review
- Could Biomarkers Direct Therapy for the Septic Patient?The Journal of pharmacology and experimental therapeutics · 2016Review
- MFHAS1 Is Associated with Sepsis and Stimulates TLR2/NF-κB Signaling Pathway Following Negative Regulation.PloS one · 2015Article
- Heart Rate Variability in Porcine Progressive Peritonitis-Induced Sepsis.Frontiers in physiology · 2015Article
- Procalcitonin, MR-Proadrenomedullin, and Cytokines Measurement in Sepsis Diagnosis: Advantages from Test Combination.Disease markers · 2015Article
- Mortality Prediction Model of Septic Shock Patients Based on Routinely Recorded Data.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Beside many efforts to improve outcome, sepsis is still one of the most frequent causes of death in critically ill patients. It is the most common condition with high mortality in intensive care units. The complexity of the septic syndrome comprises immunological aspects - i.e., sepsis induced immunosuppression - but is not restricted to this fact in modern concepts. So far, exact mechanisms and variables determining outcome and mortality stay unclear. Since there is no typical risk profile, early diagnosis and risk stratification remain difficult, which hinders rapid and effective treatment initiation. Due to the heterogeneous nature of sepsis, potential therapy options should be adapted to the individual. Biomarkers like C-reactive protein and procalcitonin are routinely used as complementary tools in clinical decision-making. Beyond the acute phase proteins, a wide bunch of promising substances and non-laboratory tools with potential diagnostic and prognostic value is under intensive investigation. So far, clinical decision just based on biomarker assessment is not yet feasible. However, biomarkers should be considered as a complementary approach.
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.