ArticlePloS one2021
A novel procalcitonin-based score for detecting sepsis among critically ill patients.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of risk factors for acute kidney injury in fulminant myocarditis and development of a renal prognosis prediction model.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Prevalence and microbiological profile of septic complications following ECMO decannulation: a prospective single-center study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diagnostic and Prognostic Roles of Procalcitonin and Other Tools in Community-Acquired Pneumonia: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A New Scoring System for Predicting Mortality in Hematological Malignancies with Sepsis: A Derivation and Validation Study.Cancer management and research · 2023Article
- The prognostic value of procalcitonin in critically ill cases of systematic inflammatory response syndrome in dogs.Comparative clinical pathology · 2023Article
- Comparison of Two Predictive Models of Sepsis in Critically Ill Patients Based on the Combined Use of Inflammatory Markers.International journal of general medicine · 2022Article
- Predictive Ability of Procalcitonin for Acute Kidney Injury: A Narrative Review Focusing on the Interference of Infection.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProcalcitonin (PCT) has been widely investigated as an infection biomarker. The study aimed to prove that serum PCT, combining with other relevant variables, has an even better sepsis-detecting ability in critically ill patients.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study in a regional teaching hospital enrolling eligible patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) between July 1, 2016, and December 31, 2016, and followed them until March 31, 2017. The primary outcome measurement was the occurrence of sepsis. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine the independent factors for sepsis and constructed a novel PCT-based score containing these factors. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) was applied to evaluate sepsis-detecting abilities. Finally, we validated the score using a validation cohort.
resultsA total of 258 critically ill patients (70.9±16.3 years; 55.4% man) were enrolled in the derivation cohort and further subgrouped into the sepsis group (n = 115) and the non-sepsis group (n = 143). By using the multivariate logistic regression analysis, we disclosed five independent factors for detecting sepsis, namely, "serum PCT level," "albumin level" and "neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio" at ICU admission, along with "diabetes mellitus," and "with vasopressor." We subsequently constructed a PCT-based score containing the five weighted factors. The PCT-based score performed well in detecting sepsis with the cut-points of 8 points (AUROC 0.80; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74-0.85; sensitivity 0.70; specificity 0.76), which was better than PCT alone, C-reactive protein and infection probability score. The findings were confirmed using an independent validation cohort (n = 72, 69.2±16.7 years, 62.5% men) (cut-point: 8 points; AUROC, 0.79; 95% CI 0.69-0.90; sensitivity 0.64; specificity 0.87).
conclusionsWe proposed a novel PCT-based score that performs better in detecting sepsis than serum PCT levels alone, C-reactive protein, and infection probability score.
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.