ArticleJournal of intensive care2018
The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016).
Article in Journal of intensive care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
46 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Early management of adult sepsis and septic shock: Korean clinical practice guidelines.Acute and critical care · 2024Guideline
- Pooled it
- Corticosteroid therapy for sepsis: a clinical practice guideline.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2018Guideline
- Effect of Anticoagulant Versus Non-Anticoagulant Therapy on Mortality of Sepsis-Induced Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Sepsis-Specific Risk Factors for Augmented Renal Clearance (ARC) and the Effect of Inflammation on Duration of ARC in Patients with Sepsis: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of the Japanese clinical practice guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock (J-SSCG) 2020 on real-world adherence and interhospital variation: a nationwide inpatient database study.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Steroid Therapy for Patients with Septic Shock: A Multicenter Observational Study Conducted in Japan.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2024Observational
- Association between reduced muscle mass and poor prognosis of biliary sepsis.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- Decoding Sepsis-Induced Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation: A Comprehensive Review of Existing and Emerging Therapies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Pathophysiology of Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation in Sepsis: A Clinically Focused Overview.Cells · 2023Review
- Early Mobilization for Critically Ill Patients.Respiratory care · 2023Review
- Modifications of peripheral perfusion in patients with vasopressor-dependent septic shock treated with polymyxin B-direct hemoperfusion.Scientific reports · 2023Observational
- Thrombocytopenia, anasarca, and renal insufficiency as severe and rare complications of Hodgkin lymphoma: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2023Article
- Peritonitis caused by group A streptococcus: A case report and literature review.International journal of surgery case reports · 2022Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Death Risk Factors of Severe Sepsis in Children.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- Rapidly progressive brain atrophy in septic ICU patients: a retrospective descriptive study using semiautomatic CT volumetry.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Article
- Management of incidentally detected idiopathic pneumoperitoneum: A case report and literature review.International journal of surgery case reports · 2021Article
- Observational
- The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020).Journal of intensive care · 2021Article
- Antithrombin and Its Role in Host Defense and Inflammation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
73 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeThe Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J-SSCG 2016), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in February 2017 and published in
methodsMembers of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine were selected and organized into 19 committee members and 52 working group members. The guidelines were prepared in accordance with the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (Minds) creation procedures. The Academic Guidelines Promotion Team was organized to oversee and provide academic support to the respective activities allocated to each Guideline Creation Team. To improve quality assurance and workflow transparency, a mutual peer review system was established, and discussions within each team were open to the public. Public comments were collected once after the initial formulation of a clinical question (CQ) and twice during the review of the final draft. Recommendations were determined to have been adopted after obtaining support from a two-thirds (> 66.6%) majority vote of each of the 19 committee members.
resultsA total of 87 CQs were selected among 19 clinical areas, including pediatric topics and several other important areas not covered in the first edition of the Japanese guidelines (J-SSCG 2012). The approval rate obtained through committee voting, in addition to ratings of the strengths of the recommendation, and its supporting evidence were also added to each recommendation statement. We conducted meta-analyses for 29 CQs. Thirty-seven CQs contained recommendations in the form of an expert consensus due to insufficient evidence. No recommendations were provided for five CQs.
conclusionsBased on the evidence gathered, we were able to formulate Japanese-specific clinical practice guidelines that are tailored to the Japanese context in a highly transparent manner. These guidelines can easily be used not only by specialists, but also by non-specialists, general clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, clinical engineers, and other healthcare professionals.
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.