Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 417

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines on the Management of Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the ICU: First Update

Open access
Alhazzani, Waleed, Evans, Laura, Alshamsi, Fayez, Møller, Morten Hylander, Ostermann, Marlies, Prescott, Hallie C., Arabi, Yaseen M., Loeb, Mark, Ng Gong, Michelle, Fan, Eddy, Oczkowski, Simon, Levy, Mitchell M., Derde, Lennie, Dzierba, Amy, Du, Bin, Machado, Flavia, Wunsch, Hannah, Crowther, Mark, Cecconi, Maurizio, Koh, Younsuck, Burry, Lisa, Chertow, Daniel S., Szczeklik, Wojciech, Belley-Cote, Emilie, Greco, Massimiliano, Bala, Malgorzata, Zarychanski, Ryan, Kesecioglu, Jozef, McGeer, Allison, Mermel, Leonard, Mammen, Manoj J., Nainan Myatra, Sheila, Arrington, Amy, Kleinpell, Ruth, Citerio, Giuseppe, Lewis, Kimberley, Bridges, Elizabeth, Memish, Ziad A., Hammond, Naomi, Hayden, Frederick G., Alshahrani, Muhammed, Al Duhailib, Zainab, Martin, Greg S., Kaplan, Lewis J., Coopersmith, Craig M., Antonelli, Massimo, Rhodes, Andrew·2021·Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic continues to affect millions worldwide. Given the rapidly growing evidence base, we implemented a living guideline model to provide guidance on the management of patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. METHODS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Disease 2019 panel has expanded to include 43 experts from 14 countries; all panel members completed an electronic conflict-of-interest disclosure form. In this update, the panel addressed nine questions relevant to managing severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. We used the World Health Organization’s definition of severe and critical coronavirus disease 2019. The systematic reviews team searched the literature for relevant evidence, aiming to identify systematic reviews and clinical trials. When appropriate, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis to summarize treatment effects. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach, then used the evidence-to-decision framework to generate recommendations based on the balance between benefit and harm, resource and cost implications, equity, and feasibility. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued nine statements (three new and six updated) related to ICU patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019. For severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019, the panel strongly recommends using systemic corticosteroids and venous thromboprophylaxis but strongly recommends against using hydroxychloroquine. In addition, the panel suggests using dexamethasone (compared with other corticosteroids) and suggests against using convalescent plasma and therapeutic anticoagulation outside clinical trials. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel suggests using remdesivir in nonventilated patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 and suggests against starting remdesivir in patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 outside clinical trials. Because of insufficient evidence, the panel did not issue a recommendation on the use of awake prone positioning. CONCLUSION: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Coronavirus Diease 2019 panel issued several recommendations to guide healthcare professionals caring for adults with critical or severe coronavirus disease 2019 in the ICU. Based on a living guideline model the recommendations will be updated as new evidence becomes available.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/ccm.0000000000004899

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

1 retracted

Show all 60 references

Cited by

See all 417

Metadata

Authors
Alhazzani, W., Evans, L., Alshamsi, F., Møller, M. H., Ostermann, M., Prescott, H. C., Arabi, Y. M., Loeb, M., Ng Gong, M., Fan, E., Oczkowski, S., Levy, M. M., Derde, L., Dzierba, A., Du, B., Machado, F., Wunsch, H., Crowther, M., Cecconi, M., Koh, Y., Burry, L., Chertow, D. S., Szczeklik, W., Belley-Cote, E., Greco, M., Bala, M., Zarychanski, R., Kesecioglu, J., McGeer, A., Mermel, L., Mammen, M. J., Nainan Myatra, S., Arrington, A., Kleinpell, R., Citerio, G., Lewis, K., Bridges, E., Memish, Z. A., Hammond, N., Hayden, F. G., Alshahrani, M., Al Duhailib, Z., Martin, G. S., Kaplan, L. J., Coopersmith, C. M., Antonelli, M., & Rhodes, A.
Venue
Critical Care Medicine
Published
2021-01-28
Volume
49
Issue
3
Pages
e219-e234
ISSN
0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3129128302
Cited by
417
References
60
FWCI
27.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines on the Management of Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the ICU: First Update. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/ccm.0000000000004899
The paper
Alhazzani, W., Evans, L., Alshamsi, F., Møller, M. H., Ostermann, M., Prescott, H. C., Arabi, Y. M., Loeb, M., Ng Gong, M., Fan, E., Oczkowski, S., Levy, M. M., Derde, L., Dzierba, A., Du, B., Machado, F., Wunsch, H., Crowther, M., Cecconi, M., . . . Rhodes, A. (2021). Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines on the Management of Adults With Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the ICU: First Update. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0000000000004899

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.