Observational studyThe Journal of emergency medicine2025
Comparable Outcomes in Suspected Septic Shock: A Retrospective Study of Emergency Department Patients With and Without Bacteremia.
Observational study in The Journal of emergency 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.
- Vasopressor Dosing Trajectories in Septic Shock According to Initial Antimicrobial Susceptibility and Infection Source Concordance: A Retrospective Observational Study.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBacteremia is commonly present in patients with septic shock. Previous studies have found mixed associations between hospital outcomes and the presence of bacteremia in this patient population.
objectivesThe primary aim of this study was to determine whether adult patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with suspected septic shock and who have bacteremia from ED-derived blood cultures have differences in outcomes. Secondary aims included the association of Gram-positive, Gram-negative, and mixed Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteremia on hospital mortality. Finally, we sought to create a model to predict bacteremia based on ED variables.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational analysis at an urban academic center over a 5-year period between 2013 and 2018. Suspected septic shock was defined by the following: blood cultures collected, antibiotics administered, and vasopressors initiated in the ED. Hospital outcomes were compared in those with and without bacteremia. A logistic regression analysis was used to fit a model to best predict the presence of bacteremia based on ED variables.
resultsWe analyzed 470,558 patient encounters, and 847 were classified as suspected septic shock, meeting inclusion criteria. Two hundred forty-three (28.7%) were categorized as having bacteremia. No statistical differences were detected in univariate comparisons between patients with and without bacteremia in hospital mortality, hospital length of stay, intensive care unit length of stay, or intubation during hospitalization between those with and without bacteremia. Hospital mortality was not associated with bacteremia based on subgroup analysis by Gram stain.
conclusionsAdult patients who present to the ED with suspected septic shock and have initial blood cultures that result in bacteremia experience hospital outcomes comparable with those without bacteremia.
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.