The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why Sepsis Trials Fail
Abstract
FEW CRITICAL conditions in medicine are as paradoxical as the events occurring during sepsis. The response of the patient's body to an insult such as infection or severe injury may initially be appropriate, but such defenses can lose their usual balance and destroy the patient. If the defense forces could be down-regulated after they have responded to the initial insult but before they begin destroying the body itself, we could prevent sepsis from developing—or at least reduce the associated mortality. Deceptively simple, a viable way to accomplish this downregulation has eluded intense clinical research scrutiny for more than 10 years. All the trials of new therapies for sepsis conducted to date have failed to show efficacy (Table). Conducted under the rigorous conditions of the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, their uniformly negative results have provoked great disappointment. I believe the trials have reached the correct conclusion. The problem has not been
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Trends in Infectious Diseases Mortality in the United States
Pinner, R. W. (1996) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03530270029027 · Cited by 487
Cited by
Kellum, J. A. (2007) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.167.15.1655 · Cited by 828
Hemodynamic and metabolic effects of low-dose vasopressin infusions in vasodilatory septic shock
Tsuneyoshi, I., Yamada, H., Kakihana, Y., Nakamura, M., Nakano, Y., & Boyle, W. A. (2001) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/00003246-200103000-00004 · Cited by 592
Sanlioglu, S., Williams, C. M., Samavati, L., Butler, N. S., Wang, G., McCray, P. B., Ritchie, T. C., Hunninghake, G. W., Zandi, E., & Engelhardt, J. F. (2001) · Journal of Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1074/jbc.m102061200 · Cited by 395
SEVERE SEPSIS AND SEPTIC SHOCK
Balk, R. A. (2000) · Critical Care Clinics · doi:10.1016/s0749-0704(05)70106-8 · Cited by 277
Martin-Loeches, I., Lisboa, T., Rodriguez, A., Putensen, C., Annane, D., Garnacho-Montero, J., Restrepo, M. I., & Rello, J. (2010) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-009-1730-y · Cited by 254
Metadata
- Authors
- Bone, R. C.
- Venue
- JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1996-08-21
- Volume
- 276
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 565
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2024133296
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why Sepsis Trials Fail. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1996.03540070061032
- The paper
- Bone, R. C. (1996). Why Sepsis Trials Fail. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1996.03540070061032
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.