ArticleCritical care explorations2021
Diagnostic Potential of Coagulation-Related Biomarkers for Sepsis in the Emergency Department: Protocol for a Pilot Observational Cohort Study.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The prognostic utility of protein C as a biomarker for adult sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Recognizing Coagulation Disorders in Sepsis in the Emergency Room: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Stressing the endoplasmic reticulum response as a diagnostic tool for sepsis.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Single-step measurement of cell-free DNA for sepsis prognosis using a thread-based microfluidic device.Mikrochimica acta · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBetween 75% and 80% of patients with sepsis arrive in the hospital through the emergency department. Early diagnosis is important to alter patient prognosis, but currently, there is no reliable biomarker. The innate immune response links inflammation and coagulation. Several coagulation -related biomarkers are associated with poor prognosis in the ICU. The role of coagulation biomarkers to aid in early sepsis diagnosis has not previously been investigated. The objective of our study is to determine the individual or combined accuracy of coagulation and inflammation biomarkers with standard biochemical tests to diagnose adult septic patients presenting to the emergency department.
methodsin the Emergency Department is a prospective, observational cohort study with a target enrolment of 250 suspected septic patients from two Canadian emergency departments. The emergency physicians will enroll patients with suspected sepsis. Blood samples will be collected at two time points (initial presentation and 4 hr following). Patients will be adjudicated into septic, infected, or not infected status in accordance with the Sepsis-3 definitions. Patient demographics, cultures, diagnosis, and biomarkers will be reported using descriptive statistics. Optimal cut off values with sensitivity and specificity for each biomarker will be determined using C-statistics to distinguish between septic and nonseptic patients. Stepwise multiple logistic regression analysis with exclusion of nonsignificant covariates from the final model will be used to establish a panel of biomarkers.
conclusionsOur protocol describes the processes and methods for a pragmatic observational biomarker study in the emergency department. This study will seek to determine the potential diagnostic importance of early coagulation abnormalities to identify additional tools for sepsis diagnosis.
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.