ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Context and determinants for implementing a sepsis survivor care transition intervention reported from five health systems and home health agencies.
Article in Frontiers in 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.
- Current state of electronic problems lists in primary care: a rapid scoping review.Family practice · 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Care transitions from acute to post-acute care are complex, especially for sepsis survivors. Implementation science offers valuable insights to translate best practices and improve care transitions. Our objective is to explore the context (site characteristics and personnel) and determinants (barriers, proposed strategies, and facilitators) influencing I-TRANSFER, a Type 1 hybrid implementation science study aimed at providing timely home health and outpatient visits for sepsis survivors within 1 week of hospital discharge. Methods: Qualitative, descriptive design with interviews guided by the eight study objectives and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Ninety-one leaders in clinical, quality, and administrative roles caring for sepsis survivors in five healthcare systems (16 hospitals) and five affiliated home health care agencies in four states participated. Deductive and inductive thematic analysis of 61 interviews conducted using NVivo 14. Proposed strategies were mapped to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) taxonomy. Results: A total of 32 themes emerged. Barriers included Conclusion: The interviews produced actionable insights for leaders, clinicians, providers, and policy makers regarding identifying sepsis through clear definitions, using the problem list and ICD-10 coding. Scheduling outpatient care, communicating to the next level of care, and providing timely follow-up and care coordination necessitates attention to staffing, tools for scheduling and quality measurement, and EHR integration for information transfer. Patient education is critical for awareness of risk and informed decision-making regarding follow-up after discharge.
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.