Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42675251›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2026

Teaching to the Test: Threading the Needle on Sepsis Quality Metrics.

Josué Zapata, Gurpreet Dhaliwal

Abstract readEditorial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Josué ZapataMedical Service, San Francisco VA Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA. Josue.Zapata@ucsf.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7729-2318
Gurpreet DhaliwalMedical Service, San Francisco VA Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As quality metrics become more tightly linked to reimbursement and reputation, medical educators face the growing challenge of teaching clinical medicine in the context of policy-driven mandates. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services sepsis bundle (SEP-1) requires physicians to execute time-bound interventions with little flexibility, while clinicians' professional duty compels them to individualize care based on evidence, comorbidities, and evolving best practices. This perspective explores how educators can prepare trainees to recognize when clinical actions are grounded in evidence-based practice, professional judgment, or the demands of a protocol. Teachers should become skilled at narrating the moments when clinical care and compliance overlap, diverge, or conflict. Post hoc reflection plays a critical role in consolidating these lessons, allowing trainees to explore trade-offs and question assumptions. Medical educators must guide learners through today's system while preparing them to shape it tomorrow.

Indexed as

competenciesgraduate medical educationorganizational behaviorpay for performance

Identifiers

PMID42675251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.