Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34120605›Full record

SynthesisBMC emergency medicine2021

Predicting mortality in adult patients with sepsis in the emergency department by using combinations of biomarkers and clinical scoring systems: a systematic review.

Kirby Tong-Minh, Iris Welten, Henrik Endeman, Tjebbe Hagenaars, Christian Ramakers, Diederik Gommers, Eric van Gorp, Yuri van der Does

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC emergency medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Diagnostic Value of End-Tidal Carbon Dioxide Combined With Lactate for Early Detection of Sepsis in Prehospital Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kirby Tong-MinhDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. k.tong-minh@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-8373-0011
Iris WeltenDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Henrik EndemanDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Tjebbe HagenaarsDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Christian RamakersDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Diederik GommersDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Eric van GorpDepartment of Internal Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Yuri van der DoesDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000, CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSepsis can be detected in an early stage in the emergency department (ED) by biomarkers and clinical scoring systems. A combination of multiple biomarkers or biomarker with clinical scoring system might result in a higher predictive value on mortality. The goal of this systematic review is to evaluate the available literature on combinations of biomarkers and clinical scoring systems on 1-month mortality in patients with sepsis in the ED.

methodsWe performed a systematic search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar. Articles were included if they evaluated at least one biomarker combined with another biomarker or clinical scoring system and reported the prognostic accuracy on 28 or 30 day mortality by area under the curve (AUC) in patients with sepsis. We did not define biomarker cut-off values in advance.

resultsWe included 18 articles in which a total of 35 combinations of biomarkers and clinical scoring systems were studied, of which 33 unique combinations. In total, seven different clinical scoring systems and 21 different biomarkers were investigated. The combination of procalcitonin (PCT), lactate, interleukin-6 (IL-6) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score-2 (SAPS-2) resulted in the highest AUC on 1-month mortality.

conclusionThe studies we found in this systematic review were too heterogeneous to conclude that a certain combination it should be used in the ED to predict 1-month mortality in patients with sepsis. Future studies should focus on clinical scoring systems which require a limited amount of clinical parameters, such as the qSOFA score in combination with a biomarker that is already routinely available in the ED.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalHospital MortalitySepsisAdultBiomarkersHumansInterleukin-6Lactic AcidProcalcitoninPrognosisROC CurveBiomarkersIL6 protein, humanInterleukin-6Lactic AcidProcalcitoninBiomarkersEmergency departmentPrediction modelSepsis

Identifiers

PMID34120605
PMCPMC8201689
OpenAlexW3136946584

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.