ArticlePloS one2025
Effect of the hour-1 bundle on clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis and septic shock: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrated bioinformatics analysis reveals cross-talking hub genes and therapeutic agents between sepsis and acute myocardial infarction.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Clinical Evaluation of Microneedle Biosensors for Continuous Lactate Monitoring in Critically Ill Patients.ACS sensors · 2026Article
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
backgroundAccording to the 2018 bundle guidelines of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, many emergency departments and intensive care units currently adopt the hour-1 bundle as a standard practice for sepsis management. However, recent studies on the hour-1 bundle for sepsis treatment have yielded inconsistent results, raising questions and challenges about its clinical efficacy.
aimThis study will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the impact of the hour-1 bundle and non-hour-1 bundle on the clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis and septic shock.
methodsThe protocol was prepared according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses protocol (PRISMA-P) statement. The systematic review will be carried out in line with the statement of PRISMA. The following electronic databases will be searched: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. All clinical studies comparing the impact of the hour-1 bundle and non-hour-1 bundle on clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis and septic shock will be included. All stages of the literature search, study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Any disagreements between the two reviewers will be resolved by discussion or arbitration by a third reviewer. The primary outcome will be short-term mortality, which involves in-hospital, 28-day, 30-day, and 90-day mortality corresponding to the definition used in each study. For quality assessment, the risk of bias specified by the Cochrane Collaboration and the methodological index for non-randomized studies will be used for randomized control trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, respectively. Data synthesis will be performed via Review Manager 5.1.0. EXPECTED
resultsThis systematic review will integrate all relevant studies to quantitatively estimate the effect size and clarify the role of the hour-1 bundle in sepsis management, contributing new evidence-based guidance to the field. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Protocol registration and reporting: PROSPERO CRD42024579314.
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.