ArticleFamily practice2021
Use of sepsis-related diagnostic criteria in primary care: a survey among general practitioners.
Article in Family practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosing Sepsis in Primary Care: Navigating Clinical Uncertainty Across Vulnerable Patient Groups.Cureus · 2026Review
- Challenges in early detection and prognostication of sepsis: new approaches from the emergency department and intensive care unit.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- A program to improve sepsis management in the Emergency Department: a multicenter prospective study in France.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Be-SNAP: the Belgian Sepsis National Action Plan.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Exploiting the Features of Clinical Judgment to Improve Assessment of Disease Severity in the Emergency Department: An Acutelines Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- New clinical prediction model for early recognition of sepsis in adult primary care patients: a prospective diagnostic cohort study of development and external validation.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Vital signs, clinical rules, and gut feeling: an observational study among patients with fever.BJGP open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUse of sepsis-criteria in hospital settings is effective in realizing early recognition, adequate treatment and reduction of sepsis-associated morbidity and mortality. Whether general practitioners (GPs) use these diagnostic criteria is unknown.
objectiveTo gauge the knowledge and use of various diagnostic criteria. To determine which parameters GPs associate with an increased likelihood of sepsis.
methodsTwo thousand five hundred and sixty GPs were invited and 229 agreed to participate in a survey, reached out to through e-mail and WhatsApp groups. The survey consisted of two parts: the first part aimed to obtain information about the GP, training and knowledge about sepsis recognition, and the second part tested specific knowledge using six realistic cases.
resultsTwo hundred and six questionnaires, representing a response rate of 8.1%, were eligible for analysis. Gut feeling (98.1%) was the most used diagnostic method, while systemic inflammatory response syndrome (37.9%), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) (7.8%) and UK Sepsis Trust criteria (UKSTc) (1.5%) were used by the minority of the GPs. Few of the responding GPs had heard of either the qSOFA (27.7%) or the UKSTc (11.7%). Recognition of sepsis varied greatly between GPs. GPs most strongly associated the individual signs of the qSOFA (mental status, systolic blood pressure, capillary refill time and respiratory rate) with diagnosing sepsis in the test cases.
conclusionsGPs mostly use gut feeling to diagnose sepsis and are frequently not familiar with the 'sepsis-criteria' used in hospital settings, although clinical reasoning was mostly in line with the qSOFA score. In order to improve sepsis recognition in primary care, GPs should be educated in the use of available screening tools.
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.