ReviewFrontiers in medicine2024
Reevaluating vitamin C in sepsis and septic shock: a potential benefit in severe cases?
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of vitamin C infusion in postoperative mechanically ventilated neonates with sepsis: a randomized controlled trial.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Trial
- High-Dose Intravenous Vitamin C in Critical Illness: A Translational Exposure-Response Framework for Biomarker-Guided Precision Therapy.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Antioxidants and Reactive Oxygen Species: Shaping Human Health and Disease Outcomes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Time Matters: Methane Inhalation Mitigates Mitochondrial and Organ Dysfunction in Advanced Experimental Sepsis.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Targeting alveolar macrophages: a promising intervention for pulmonary infection and acute lung injury.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2025Review
- Appropriately Designed Studies are Needed before Thiamine and Vitamin C Plus Hydrocortisone are Judged Non-beneficial in Septic Shock.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vitamin C (Ascorbic acid) has evolved as an emergent co-intervention for sepsis and septic shock patients. Multiple studies discussed the pathophysiological value of vitamin C to reserve endothelial functionality and improve microcirculatory flow in these patients. Nevertheless, most randomized clinical trials failed to show the clinical impact of adding vitamin C to sepsis and septic shock. Pneumonia is the most common infection to induce sepsis and septic shock, which could be an acute respiratory distress syndrome. Preliminary
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.