SynthesisIntensive care medicine2026
Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock in Children 2026.
Synthesis in Intensive care medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- POCUS for the general pediatrician: a narrative review of practical applications, policy, and training.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Management of arterial hypotension in critically Ill children: a narrative review and practical approach.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Early clinical determinants of adverse outcomes in paediatric febrile neutropenia: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- A standardized educational implementation strategy improves operational Code Sepsis knowledge in a high-complexity hospital in Colombia.Frontiers in health services · 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
70 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo update evidence-based management recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with sepsis or septic shock.
designA panel of 68 international experts, representing 13 international organizations, as well as six methodologists, was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and applied throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and subgroup leads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.
methodsNew priority topics and recommendations from the prior guideline iteration were used to identify Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) questions likely to have new or updated evidence. We conducted a systematic review to identify the best available evidence, summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or conditional, or as a good practice statement. "In our practice," statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.
resultsThe panel provided 61 statements on the management of children with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 24 were conditional recommendations, and ten were good practice statements. For 22 PICO questions, no recommendations could be made, but for seven of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. Compared with the 2020 guidelines, 20 recommendations were new, 13 were updated for clarity and/or new evidence, six were reviewed but not changed, and 22 were carried forward based on consensus of the panel that new evidence was not available. Only three recommendations were based on high or moderate certainty of evidence.
conclusionsUpdated management guidelines were issued by a panel of international experts for the best care of children with sepsis or septic shock, acknowledging that most aspects of care continue to have relatively low quality of evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41870559What 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.