ArticleCritical care medicine2026
The Role of Perceived Urgency and Barriers in Using Emergency Medical Care for Sepsis: A German-Wide, Representative Survey Using Case Vignettes.
Article in Critical care medicine, 2026. 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.
- Temporal trends and social determinants of sepsis knowledge in Brazil: findings from three national cross-sectional surveys.Annals of intensive care · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDelays in emergency medical care (EMC) can increase sepsis mortality. Sepsis symptoms, however, are less known in the public compared with signs of stroke and myocardial infarction. Using case vignettes, we investigated the decision to seek EMC in sepsis-related compared with other emergencies.
designCross-sectional survey. SETTINGS AND SUBJECTS: A representative nationwide survey was conducted in December 2023 among 1013 persons in Germany.
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsA standardized questionnaire was administered via face-to-face interviews to assess perceived urgency, the tendency to seek EMC, sepsis knowledge, and barriers to EMC utilization. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to identify predictors for the perceived urgency and the tendency to seek EMC. Across ten case vignettes, the perceived urgency was lower for sepsis-related (mean = 3.93, sd = 0.64) than for nonsepsis-related emergencies (mean=4.15, sd = 0.67). In sepsis-related vignettes, the immediate EMC option ("Call emergency medical services or go to the emergency department [ED] immediately") was chosen by 18.3-43.2% of respondents, compared with 20.1-71.9% in nonsepsis-related vignettes. Even when situations were rated as very urgent, EMC use was less likely for sepsis-related emergencies (35%) than for nonsepsis-related emergencies (17%). In regression analyses, sepsis knowledge was the only predictor of perceived urgency, and perceived urgency was the strongest predictor of EMC use. The likelihood of EMC use in sepsis-related emergencies was 14.9 percentage points lower ( p < 0.01) than in nonsepsis-related emergencies; "long waiting times in the ED" was the only significant barrier for EMC use.
conclusionsCompared with nonsepsis emergencies, sepsis-related emergencies are perceived as less urgent and less often lead to EMC use, even if the level of perceived urgency is the same. As the perceived urgency is associated with sepsis knowledge, this underlines the need to increase efforts to improve sepsis knowledge and the awareness that sepsis requires timely emergency care in the general public.
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.