Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38607592›Full record

Observational studyInfection2024

Predictive performance of NEWS and qSOFA in immunocompromised sepsis patients at the emergency department.

Lisanne Boekhoud, Helena M E A Schaap, Rick L Huizinga, Tycho J Olgers, Jan C Ter Maaten, Douwe F Postma, Hjalmar R Bouma

Erratum issuedAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Infection, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Recent advances in early screening and diagnosis of sepsis: a narrative review.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. The Sepsis Score Dilemma: Balancing Precision and Utility.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lisanne Boekhoud *Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, EB70, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Helena M E A Schaap *Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Rick L HuizingaDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Tycho J OlgersDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jan C Ter MaatenDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Douwe F PostmaDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Hjalmar R BoumaDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 30.001, EB70, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. h.r.bouma@umcg.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSepsis has a high incidence and a poor prognosis. Early recognition is important to facilitate timely initiation of adequate care. Sepsis screening tools, such as the (quick) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment ((q)SOFA) and National Early Warning Score (NEWS), could help recognize sepsis. These tools have been validated in a general immunocompetent population, while their performance in immunocompromised patients, who are particularly at risk of sepsis development, remains unknown.

methodsThis study is a post hoc analysis of a prospective observational study performed at the emergency department. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years with a suspected infection, while ≥ two qSOFA and/or SOFA criteria were used to classify patients as having suspected sepsis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.

results1516 patients, of which 40.5% used one or more immunosuppressives, were included. NEWS had a higher prognostic accuracy as compared to qSOFA for predicting poor outcome among immunocompromised sepsis patients. Of all tested immunosuppressives, high-dose glucocorticoid therapy was associated with a threefold increased risk of both in-hospital and 28-day mortality.

conclusionIn contrast to NEWS, qSOFA underestimates the risk of adverse outcome in patients using high-dose glucocorticoids. As a clinical consequence, to adequately assess the severity of illness among immunocompromised patients, health care professionals should best use the NEWS.

Indexed as

Emergency Service, HospitalImmunocompromised HostOrgan Dysfunction ScoresSepsisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overEarly Warning ScoreFemaleHospital MortalityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesEarly recognitionEmergency departmentImmunocompromisedNEWS(q)SOFASepsis

Identifiers

PMID38607592
PMCPMC11499318

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.