The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Goal-Directed Resuscitation for Patients with Early Septic Shock
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Early goal-directed therapy (EGDT) has been endorsed in the guidelines of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign as a key strategy to decrease mortality among patients presenting to the emergency department with septic shock. However, its effectiveness is uncertain. METHODS: In this trial conducted at 51 centers (mostly in Australia or New Zealand), we randomly assigned patients presenting to the emergency department with early septic shock to receive either EGDT or usual care. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 90 days after randomization. RESULTS: Of the 1600 enrolled patients, 796 were assigned to the EGDT group and 804 to the usual-care group. Primary outcome data were available for more than 99% of the patients. Patients in the EGDT group received a larger mean (±SD) volume of intravenous fluids in the first 6 hours after randomization than did those in the usual-care group (1964±1415 ml vs. 1713±1401 ml) and were more likely to receive vasopressor infusions (66.6% vs. 57.8%), red-cell transfusions (13.6% vs. 7.0%), and dobutamine (15.4% vs. 2.6%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). At 90 days after randomization, 147 deaths had occurred in the EGDT group and 150 had occurred in the usual-care group, for rates of death of 18.6% and 18.8%, respectively (absolute risk difference with EGDT vs. usual care, -0.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -4.1 to 3.6; P=0.90). There was no significant difference in survival time, in-hospital mortality, duration of organ support, or length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients presenting to the emergency department with early septic shock, EGDT did not reduce all-cause mortality at 90 days. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the Alfred Foundation; ARISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00975793.).
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
Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock
Rivers, E., Nguyen, B., Havstad, S., Ressler, J., Muzzin, A., Knoblich, B., Peterson, E., & Tomlanovich, M. (2001) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa010307 · Cited by 10,743
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock
Dellinger, R. P., Levy, M. M., Rhodes, A., Annane, D., Gerlach, H., Opal, S. M., Sevransky, J. E., Sprung, C. L., Douglas, I. S., Jaeschke, R., et al. (2013) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e31827e83af · Cited by 9,694
A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care
Hébert, P. C., Wells, G., Blajchman, M. A., Marshall, J., Martin, C., Pagliarello, G., Tweeddale, M., Schweitzer, I., & Yetisir, E. (1999) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199902113400601 · Cited by 5,187
Intensive versus Conventional Glucose Control in Critically Ill Patients
(2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0810625 · Cited by 5,119
A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock.
The ProCESS Investigators (2014) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1401602 · Cited by 2,414
Levy, M. M., Dellinger, R. P., Townsend, S. R., Linde-Zwirble, W. T., Marshall, J. C., Bion, J., Schorr, C., Artigas, A., Ramsay, G., Beale, R., et al. (2010) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-009-1738-3 · Cited by 868
Jawad, I., Lukšić, I., & Rafnsson, S. B. (2012) · Journal of Global Health · doi:10.7189/jogh.01.010404 · Cited by 389
Zhang, Z., Xu, X., & Ni, H. (2013) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc11919 · Cited by 295
Cited by
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016.
Rhodes, A., Evans, L. E., Alhazzani, W., Levy, M. M., Antonelli, M., Ferrer, R., Kumar, A., Sevransky, J. E., Sprung, C. L., Nunnally, M. E., et al. (2017) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6 · Cited by 6,621
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016.
Rhodes, A., Evans, L. E., Alhazzani, W., Levy, M. M., Antonelli, M., Ferrer, R., Kumar, A., Sevransky, J. E., Sprung, C. L., Nunnally, M. E., et al. (2017) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000002255 · Cited by 3,652
Cecconi, M., Evans, L., Levy, M., & Rhodes, A. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30696-2 · Cited by 2,254
Cecconi, M., De Backer, D., Antonelli, M., Beale, R., Bakker, J., Hofer, C., Jaeschke, R., Mebazaa, A., Pinsky, M. R., Teboul, J. L., et al. (2014) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3525-z · Cited by 1,767
Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock.
Mouncey, P. R., Osborn, T. M., Power, G. S., Harrison, D. A., Sadique, M. Z., Grieve, R. D., Jahan, R., Harvey, S. E., Bell, D., Bion, J. F., et al. (2015) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1500896 · Cited by 1,604
Metadata
- Authors
- The ARISE Investigators and the ANZICS Clinical Trials Group
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2014-10-16
- Volume
- 371
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 1496-1506
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2165721969
- Cited by
- 2,028
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 185.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Goal-Directed Resuscitation for Patients with Early Septic Shock. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1404380
- The paper
- The ARISE Investigators and the ANZICS Clinical Trials Group. (2014). Goal-Directed Resuscitation for Patients with Early Septic Shock. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1404380
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.
