ReviewInfection2021
Skin and sepsis: contribution of dermatology to a rapid diagnosis.
Review in Infection, 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Immunomodulatory Roles and Clinical Significance of GZMM and DDX24 in Sepsis: A Multiomics Integrative Analysis With Experimental Validation.Human mutation · 2026Article
- Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis and Steven-Johnson Syndrome During the Postpartum Period: A Literature Review with a Rare Case Presentation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Gut-skin-brain axis in people suffering from sepsis with acute skin failure.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- Optical Bionanosensors for Sepsis Diagnostics.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025Review
- Article
- Skin Lesions with Loss of Tissue and Cutaneous-Onset Sepsis: The Skin Infection-Sepsis Relationship.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Observational
- Obstructive Shock, from Diagnosis to Treatment.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
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
In patients who develop sepsis, whether due to primary, secondary or metastatic lesions, the skin is frequently affected. However, there are unresolved aspects regarding the general clinical manifestations in the skin or the prognosis and/or therapeutic implications. The main challenge in the approach to sepsis is its early diagnosis and management. In this review, we address the sepsis-skin relationship and the potential impact of early dermatological intervention on the septic patient through ten basic questions. We found little evidence of the participation of the dermatologist in sepsis alert programs. There are early skin changes that may alert clinicians on a possible sepsis, such as skin mottling or variations in acral skin temperature. In addition, the skin is an accessible and highly cost-effective tissue for etiological studies of some forms of sepsis (e.g., meningococcal purpura) and its involvement defines the prognosis of certain patients (e.g., infective endocarditis).
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.