CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,459

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mortality Related to Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Among Critically Ill Patients in Australia and New Zealand, 2000-2012

Kaukonen, Kirsi-Maija, Bailey, Michael, Suzuki, Satoshi, Pilcher, David, Bellomo, Rinaldo·2014·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.2014.2637
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Importance Severe sepsis and septic shock are major causes of mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. It is unknown whether progress has been made in decreasing their mortality rate. Objective To describe changes in mortality for severe sepsis with and without shock in ICU patients. Design, setting, and participants Retrospective, observational study from 2000 to 2012 including 101,064 patients with severe sepsis from 171 ICUs with various patient case mix in Australia and New Zealand. Main outcomes and measures Hospital outcome (mortality and discharge to home, to other hospital, or to rehabilitation). Results Absolute mortality in severe sepsis decreased from 35.0% (95% CI, 33.2%-36.8%; 949/2708) to 18.4% (95% CI, 17.8%-19.0%; 2300/12,512; P Conclusions and relevance In critically ill patients in Australia and New Zealand with severe sepsis with and without shock, there was a decrease in mortality from 2000 to 2012. These findings were accompanied by changes in the patterns of discharge to home, rehabilitation, and other hospitals.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2014.2637

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Māori patients in New Zealand are 2-3 fold more likely to develop sepsis than non‐Māori, and across all age groups are more likely to die of sepsis than non‐Māori patients.

    “For example, Māori patients in New Zealand are 2–3 fold more likely to develop sepsis than non‐Māori, and across all age groups are more likely to die of sepsis than non‐Māori patients”

    From On race, human variation, and who gets and dies of sepsis (2022) · cites this paper as Kaukonen et al., 2014

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kaukonen, K.-M., Bailey, M., Suzuki, S., Pilcher, D., & Bellomo, R.
Affiliations
  • Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC RC), Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia2Critical Care Research Group, Intensive Care Unit, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Hels
  • Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC RC), Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
  • Intensive Care Unit, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia
  • Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC RC), Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia4ANZICS Centre for Outcome and Resource Evaluation CORE, Melbourne, Australia5Department of In
  • Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC RC), Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia3Intensive Care Unit, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2014-04-02
Volume
311
Issue
13
Pages
1308
ISSN
0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.2014.2637
Cited by
1,459
References
5
Language
en

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