ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2021
Pediatric infection and sepsis in five age subgroups: single-center registry.
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hemodynamic Assessment in Newborn Infants With Sepsis: A Prospective Observational Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Growth inhibition of common neonatal pathogens differs between bovine lactoferrin products.Journal of medical microbiology · 2025Article
- Increased rates of invasive bacterial disease in late 2022.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Article
- Retrospective analysis of pediatric sepsis and the burden of antimicrobial resistance in Duhok, Kurdistan Region of Iraq.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- The Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) Can Predict Sepsis's Presence and Severity in Malnourished Infants-A Single Center Experience.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparison of Pediatric Risk of Mortality-III, Phoenix Sepsis, and pediatric Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores for predicting septic shock in Vietnamese children with sepsis.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious DiseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis is, worldwide, one of the leading causes of death among infants and children. Over the past two decades, mortality rates have declined due to advanced treatment options; however, the incidence of sepsis and septic shock is still on the rise in many hospital settings. The objective of this study was to evaluate the course of this disease in pediatric intensive care patients.
methodsAn evaluation of pediatric patients in the intensive care unit diagnosed with infections or sepsis between 2005 and 2015 was performed via a retrospective exploratory data analysis.
resultsDuring the observational period, 201 patients were diagnosed with infection or sepsis. The study population was divided into five age subgroups. The majority of patients were newborns, infants, and toddlers. Forty percent had sepsis; 6% had septic shock. Viral infection was the most prevalent (59%). The overall survival rate was 83%; newborns and adolescents had the lowest survival rates.
conclusionWith this registry, children divided into five age subgroups with infection or sepsis were evaluated and treatment strategies were examined. We have shown that our findings on children treated in our pediatric intensive care unit conform with current literature about pediatric sepsis. In addition to maintaining strict hygiene standards, optimal aspects of sepsis care should be stringently observed, such as the quick administration of empirical broad-spectrum antibiotics, initial adequate fluid resuscitation, and a reliable and frequent routine of source control.
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.