Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39531053›Full record

ReviewIntensive care medicine2024

Sepsis: key insights, future directions, and immediate goals. A review and expert opinion.

Ignacio Martin-Loeches, Mervyn Singer, Marc Leone

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Intensive care medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 120 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
120citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

120 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Molecular medicine reports · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Distribution characteristics and influencing factors of active cytomegalovirus infection in patients with hematological malignancies complicated with sepsis.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

60 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Ignacio Martin-LoechesDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Multidisciplinary Intensive Care Research Organization (MICRO), St James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. drmartinloeches@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5834-4063
Mervyn SingerBloomsbury Institute of Intensive Care Medicine, Division of Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Marc LeoneDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, North Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux, Service d'Anesthésie Et de Réanimation, Hôpital Nord, Universitaires de Marseille, Aix Marseille University, Chemin Des Bourrely, Marseille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review explores the current landscape and evolving understanding of sepsis, highlighting both challenges and future directions. Sepsis remains a major global health burden, with diverse clinical presentations complicating timely diagnosis and management. Existing definitions, including the Sepsis-3 criteria, emphasize the importance of organ dysfunction, yet early sepsis detection remains limited by available tools. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, though widely used, may not fully capture early stages of infection or account for complex presentations like noncatecholamine-resistant shock. Additionally, the review underscores the pressing need for standardized terminology across sepsis and shock characterization to ensure consistency in diagnosis and treatment strategies. Accessible, resource-adapted solutions are particularly crucial in low- and middle-income countries where sepsis-related mortality rates are higher due to limited resources. Future research should focus on developing and validating integrated, multi-parameter tools that combine clinical, biochemical, and microbiological data to improve sepsis outcomes globally. Advancing sepsis care will require both technological innovation and collaborative, globally consistent guidelines to bridge disparities in healthcare delivery.

Indexed as

Organ Dysfunction ScoresSepsisHumansICUMultiorgan failureRefractory shockSepsisSepsis-3Septic shocShock

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.