ArticleAnnals of intensive care2026
Temporal trends and social determinants of sepsis knowledge in Brazil: findings from three national cross-sectional surveys.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Public awareness of sepsis is essential for early recognition of warning signs and timely healthcare seeking behavior, but data from resource-limited settings remain scarce. Methods: We evaluated sepsis knowledge in Brazil using cross-sectional surveys conducted in 2014, 2017, and 2026. Standardized questionnaires were administered through face-to-face interviews using random sampling stratified by age, sex, and geographic region. Adequate basic knowledge was defined as having heard the term sepsis and correctly identifying it as a severe host response to infection. In 2026, we additionally assessed knowledge of sepsis time-dependent nature and long-term disability after sepsis. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with knowledge. Results: A total of 6,312 participants were interviewed (2014: n = 2,126; 2017: n = 2,100; 2026: n = 2,086). Adequate basic knowledge increased from 2.6% in 2014 to 5.8% in 2017 (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.63-3.16; p < 0.001) and 10.3% in 2026 (OR 3.45, 95% CI 2.54-4.75; p < 0.001). In 2026, 70.0% of participants acknowledged that earlier diagnosis and treatment improve survival. Awareness of long-term disabilities was lower (24.4%). Higher educational attainment was the strongest determinant of knowledge across all domains. Younger age, male sex, residence outside state capitals, and lower household income were independently associated with lower knowledge. Conclusion: Public awareness of sepsis in Brazil has improved substantially over the past decade, suggesting a positive impact of national and international awareness initiatives. Nevertheless, important knowledge gaps persist, and awareness continues to be strongly influenced by socioeconomic factors, highlighting the need for continued efforts to improve sepsis awareness and promote equitable access to health information.
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.