ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2019
Application of The Sepsis-3 Consensus Criteria in a Geriatric Acute Care Unit: A Prospective Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating frailty and acute illness severity scoring for risk stratification in acute geriatric care: Review and practical guide.World journal of critical care medicine · 2026Review
- Association between clinical frailty and multidrug-resistant positive cultures in hospitalized older adults.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Sepsis in Frail Older Adults: Tailored Antimicrobial Stewardship and Individualized Care Approach.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Surgical site infections and sepsis in gynecological surgery.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Review
- Predicting 30-day mortality in older patients with suspected infections by adding performance status to quick sequential organ failure assessment.Journal of general and family medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Enhancing in-hospital mortality prediction in older patients with sepsis: the role of frailty indices and multidrug-resistance status in non-ICU wards-a proof-of-concept study.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Apyrexia improves the prognostic value of quick SOFA in older patients with acute pneumonia or bacteremic urinary tract infection.Infection · 2023Article
- Biomarkers for risk stratification and antibiotic stewardship in elderly patients.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2023Review
- Predictive value of geriatric-quickSOFA in hospitalized older people with sepsis.BMC geriatrics · 2021Observational
- Trends of COVID-19 Admissions in an Italian Hub during the Pandemic Peak: Large Retrospective Study Focused on Older Subjects.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- The Malnutritional Status of the Host as a Virulence Factor for New Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- Current Issues and Perspectives in Patients with Possible Sepsis at Emergency Departments.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prognostic value of quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score in geriatric patients is uncertain. We aimed to compare qSOFA vs. Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) criteria for mortality prediction in older multimorbid subjects, admitted for suspected sepsis in a geriatric ward. We prospectively enrolled 272 patients (aged 83.7 ± 7.4). At admission, qSOFA and SIRS scores were calculated. Mortality was assessed during hospital stay and three months after discharge. The predictive capacity of qSOFA and SIRS was assessed by calculating the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUROC), through pairwise AUROC comparison, and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Both qSOFA and SIRS exhibited a poor prognostic performance (AUROCs 0.676, 95% CI 0.609⁻0.738, and 0.626, 95% CI 0.558⁻0.691 for in-hospital mortality; 0.684, 95% CI 0.614⁻0.748, and 0.596, 95% CI 0.558⁻0.691 for pooled three-month mortality, respectively). The predictive capacity of qSOFA showed no difference to that of SIRS for in-hospital mortality (difference between AUROCs 0.05, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.14,
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.