SynthesisThe Korean journal of internal medicine2025
Appropriate timing of antibiotic initiation in patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The Korean journal of internal medicine, 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.
- Every Hour Does Matter: A Bayesian Confirmation of Antibiotic Urgency in Sepsis.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evidence supporting antibiotic administration within 3 hours in sepsis without shock is limited. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether the timing of antibiotic initiation influences mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock. We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Korean Medical Database from inception to November, 2022, using the keywords "sepsis," "septic shock," "anti-bacterial agents," "time to treatment," and "time factors." Two reviewers independently performed eligibility screening and full-text review. Thirteen studies including 79,246 patients were analyzed: five prospective, seven retrospective, and one retrospective case-control study. In overall sepsis cases, mortality did not differ significantly between patients who received antibiotics within 1 hour and those in the delayed group but was significantly lower in those who received antibiotics within 3 hours than in those in the delayed group. In patients with septic shock, mortality was significantly lower in groups that received antibiotics within both 1 and 3 hours than in the delayed group. In septic shock, administration of antibiotics within 1 hour of diagnosis reduces mortality. In patients with sepsis, antibiotic administration within 3 hours, but not necessarily within 1 hour, was associated with reduced mortality.
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.