MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280404143 · doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287

The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)

2016· article· en· W2280404143 on OpenAlexaff
Mervyn Singer, Clifford S. Deutschman, Christopher W. Seymour, Manu Shankar‐Hari, Djillali Annane, Michael Bauer, Rinaldo Bellomo, Gordon R. Bernard, Jean‐Daniel Chiche, Craig M. Coopersmith, Richard S. Hotchkiss, Mitchell M. Levy, John C. Marshall, Greg S. Martin, Steven M. Opal, Gordon D. Rubenfeld, Tom van der Poll, Jean‐Louis Vincent, Derek C. Angus

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesDefence Science and Technology LaboratoryNational Institutes of HealthUniversitätsklinikum JenaInflaRxEuropean Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious DiseasesAcademy of Medical Royal CollegesEuropean Resuscitation CouncilEuropean Society of Intensive Care MedicineAmerican Association of Critical-Care NursesEuropean CommissionEuropean Respiratory SocietyPennsylvania State UniversityWellcome TrustCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUniversity of PennsylvaniaAstraZenecaCSL BehringIntensive Care SocietyAmerican Thoracic Society
KeywordsSepsisMedicineSeptic shockIntensive care medicineOrgan dysfunctionSystemic inflammatory response syndromeSOFA scoreEpidemiologyShock (circulatory)ImmunologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. Considerable advances have since been made into the pathobiology (changes in organ function, morphology, cell biology, biochemistry, immunology, and circulation), management, and epidemiology of sepsis, suggesting the need for reexamination. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and, as needed, update definitions for sepsis and septic shock. PROCESS: A task force (n = 19) with expertise in sepsis pathobiology, clinical trials, and epidemiology was convened by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Definitions and clinical criteria were generated through meetings, Delphi processes, analysis of electronic health record databases, and voting, followed by circulation to international professional societies, requesting peer review and endorsement (by 31 societies listed in the Acknowledgment). KEY FINDINGS FROM EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Limitations of previous definitions included an excessive focus on inflammation, the misleading model that sepsis follows a continuum through severe sepsis to shock, and inadequate specificity and sensitivity of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Multiple definitions and terminologies are currently in use for sepsis, septic shock, and organ dysfunction, leading to discrepancies in reported incidence and observed mortality. The task force concluded the term severe sepsis was redundant. RECOMMENDATIONS: Sepsis should be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. For clinical operationalization, organ dysfunction can be represented by an increase in the Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 2 points or more, which is associated with an in-hospital mortality greater than 10%. Septic shock should be defined as a subset of sepsis in which particularly profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities are associated with a greater risk of mortality than with sepsis alone. Patients with septic shock can be clinically identified by a vasopressor requirement to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 65 mm Hg or greater and serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L (>18 mg/dL) in the absence of hypovolemia. This combination is associated with hospital mortality rates greater than 40%. In out-of-hospital, emergency department, or general hospital ward settings, adult patients with suspected infection can be rapidly identified as being more likely to have poor outcomes typical of sepsis if they have at least 2 of the following clinical criteria that together constitute a new bedside clinical score termed quickSOFA (qSOFA): respiratory rate of 22/min or greater, altered mentation, or systolic blood pressure of 100 mm Hg or less. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These updated definitions and clinical criteria should replace previous definitions, offer greater consistency for epidemiologic studies and clinical trials, and facilitate earlier recognition and more timely management of patients with sepsis or at risk of developing sepsis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.009
Bibliometrics0.0110.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0090.009
Research integrity0.0060.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27,967
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207