SynthesisBMJ open2016
Identification of adults with sepsis in the prehospital environment: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 107 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2026.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Early Identification of Sepsis by Emergency Medical Services: Diagnostic Accuracy of Scoring Systems in a Retrospective Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Protocol for a multicenter, cluster-randomized, stepped-wedge, implementation trial of a prehospital sepsis protocol.Trials · 2025Article
- A program to improve sepsis management in the Emergency Department: a multicenter prospective study in France.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Point-of-care tests in the emergency medical services: a scoping review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Exploring the Potentials of Artificial Intelligence in Sepsis Management in the Intensive Care Unit.Critical care research and practice · 2025Review
- The specialization of emergency medical services in Iran: A qualitative study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- A scoping review on pediatric sepsis prediction technologies in healthcare.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- The performance of screening tools and use of blood analyses in prehospital identification of sepsis patients and patients suitable for non-conveyance - an observational study.BMC emergency medicine · 2024Observational
- [Sepsis in emergency medical services : A cohort study on screening, incidence, and mortality].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2024Article
- Article
- Recognition and Awareness of Sepsis by First-Aid Providers in Adults With Suspected Infection: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2024Article
- Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: the PHEWS observational cohort and decision-analytic modelling study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Observational
- Head-to-head comparison of pre-hospital qSOFA and lactate-qSOFA for predicting sepsis in patients with and without suspected infection. A multicenter prospective cohort study.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2024Article
- Prehospital early warning scores for adults with suspected sepsis: retrospective diagnostic cohort study.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2023Article
- Predicting sepsis using a combination of clinical information and molecular immune markers sampled in the ambulance.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Rethinking non-urgent EMS conveyance to ED during night-time - a pilot study in Southwest Finland.BMC emergency medicine · 2023Article
- A comparative study on specialized services in pre-hospital emergencies in Iran and selected countries.Journal of education and health promotion · 2023Review
- Pre-hospital Prognostic Factors of 30-Day Survival in Sepsis Patients; a Retrospective Cohort Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEarly identification of sepsis could enable prompt delivery of key interventions such as fluid resuscitation and antibiotic administration which, in turn, may lead to improved patient outcomes. Limited data indicate that recognition of sepsis by paramedics is often poor. We systematically reviewed the literature on prehospital sepsis screening tools to determine whether they improved sepsis recognition.
designSystematic review. The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and PubMed were systematically searched up to June 2015. In addition, subject experts were contacted.
settingPrehospital/emergency medical services (EMS). STUDY SELECTION: All studies addressing identification of sepsis (including severe sepsis and septic shock) among adult patients managed by EMS. OUTCOME MEASURES: Recognition of sepsis by EMS clinicians.
resultsOwing to considerable variation in the methodological approach adopted and outcome measures reported, a narrative approach to data synthesis was adopted. Three studies addressed development of prehospital sepsis screening tools. Six studies addressed paramedic diagnosis of sepsis with or without use of a prehospital sepsis screening tool.
conclusionsRecognition of sepsis by ambulance clinicians is poor. The use of screening tools, based on the Surviving Sepsis Campaign diagnostic criteria, improves prehospital sepsis recognition. Screening tools derived from EMS data have been developed, but they have not yet been validated in clinical practice. There is a need to undertake validation studies to determine whether prehospital sepsis screening tools confer any clinical benefit.
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.