ArticleCritical care (London, England)2026
Patient-level reclassification and discordance between SOFA and SOFA-2: a multicenter ICU study.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 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.
- SOFA-2 reclassification: data availability and incremental prognostic value.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score is widely used to quantify organ dysfunction in critically ill patients. A revised version, SOFA-2, was proposed to better reflect contemporary intensive care practice, but patient-level reclassification and the implications of differences between SOFA and SOFA-2 remain unclear.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study using the OneICU database, a Japanese ICU registry including 15 hospitals. Adult ICU admissions between April 2012 and December 2025 were analyzed. Day-1 SOFA and SOFA-2 scores were calculated. Reclassification patterns were visualized using Sankey diagrams, and mortality patterns were assessed using heat maps. Score discordance was defined as SOFA deviation (dSOFA = SOFA-2 - SOFA) and categorized as Negative ( ≤ - 2), Minimal ( > - 2 and < 2), or Positive (≥ 2). Two primary exact-matching analyses were performed across dSOFA categories, separately matching patients on Day-1 SOFA-2 and conventional SOFA total scores.
resultsAmong 134,528 ICU admissions, SOFA-2 resulted in systematic patient-level reclassification. Upward shifts were most frequent in the brain, cardiovascular, and respiratory subscores, whereas the kidney subscore showed bidirectional changes. Mortality increased with higher SOFA-2 subscores at fixed SOFA and with higher SOFA subscores at fixed SOFA-2. After exact matching on SOFA-2, mortality was highest in the Negative dSOFA group, in which SOFA was higher than SOFA-2. Conversely, after exact matching on conventional SOFA, mortality was highest in the Positive dSOFA group, in which SOFA-2 was higher than SOFA.
conclusionsSOFA-2 introduces systematic reclassification at the patient level. Reciprocal exact-matching analyses demonstrated that patients assigned the same severity by one scoring system remained heterogeneous in mortality according to the other scoring system. SOFA and SOFA-2 may therefore provide overlapping but complementary information for assessing organ dysfunction severity.
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.