ArticleCritical care explorations2025
Exploring the Extent and Depth of Clinical Education on Sepsis SEP-1 Core Measure and the Reported Impact on Outcomes and Compliance rate: A Scoping Review.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence to Facilitate SEP-1 Measure Compliance and Fluid Management in Sepsis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis scoping review aimed to understand the extent and depth of education provided on the severe sepsis and septic shock management bundle quality measure (SEP-1) to frontline clinicians to elicit insight regarding the impact on patient outcomes, the compliance rate, and any efforts to alleviate concerns about clinical judgment challenges with SEP-1. DATA SOURCES: Seven databases were used: ProQuest, EBSCO Host, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL for studies published in 2015 and later using key terms related to sepsis and SEP-1 quality measure. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers selected studies that mentioned the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services SEP-1 and included education to frontline clinicians on the quality measure as one of the interventions. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction included study design, publication type, what was educated to frontline clinicians, Bennet and Bennet's "depth of knowledge" through education provided, and any mention of patient outcomes and change in SEP-1 compliance rate from the study. DATA SYNTHESIS: The initial search yielded 493 articles. After screening for eligibility criteria, 20 studies were ultimately included. When evaluating what details of SEP-1 are being educated, 95% (19/20) of the studies focused on how to identify sepsis as well as the bundle elements required to pass the measure (19/20); however, the deeper details of the measure that allow clinical judgment and still pass the measure are severely lacking.
conclusionsMultiple education opportunities not currently addressed in the literature may lead to improvement of the national SEP-1 compliance rate and alleviate clinician concern that the quality measure does not allow for clinical judgment. Without deeper education, this knowledge gap could be a key factor in why the quality measure national compliance rate has halted, raising calls to retire the measure prematurely.
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.