Cited by 166Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersVitamin C and Antioxidants Research

Understanding and Enhancing Sepsis Survivorship. Priorities for Research and Practice

Open access
Prescott, Hallie C., Iwashyna, Theodore J., Blackwood, Bronagh, Calandra, Thierry, Chlan, Linda L., Choong, Karen, Connolly, Bronwen, Dark, Paul +17 more·2019·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

An estimated 14.1 million patients survive sepsis each year. Many survivors experience poor long-term outcomes, including new or worsened neuropsychological impairment; physical disability; and vulnerability to further health deterioration, including recurrent infection, cardiovascular events, and acute renal failure. However, clinical trials and guidelines have focused on shorter-term survival, so there are few data on promoting longer-term recovery. To address this unmet need, the International Sepsis Forum convened a colloquium in February 2018 titled “Understanding and Enhancing Sepsis Survivorship.” The goals were to identify gaps and limitations of current research and shorter- and longer-term priorities for understanding and enhancing sepsis survivorship. Twenty-six experts from eight countries participated. The top short-term priorities identified by nominal group technique culminating in formal voting were to better leverage existing databases for research, develop and disseminate educational resources on postsepsis morbidity, and partner with sepsis survivors to define and achieve research priorities. The top longer-term priorities were to study mechanisms of long-term morbidity through large cohort studies with deep phenotyping, build a harmonized global sepsis registry to facilitate enrollment in cohorts and trials, and complete detailed longitudinal follow-up to characterize the diversity of recovery experiences. This perspective reviews colloquium discussions, the identified priorities, and current initiatives to address them.

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 · 10.1164/rccm.201812-2383cp

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Post-critical illness programmes are consistently well-liked by patients and offer an environment to learn about challenges sepsis survivors face and to pilot and test interventions for enhancing recovery.

    “While efficacy data are equivocal, these programmes are consistently well-liked by patients and offer an environment to learn about challenges sepsis survivors face, as well as to pilot and test interventions for enhancing recovery [637, 643].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 72 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prescott, H. C., Iwashyna, T. J., Blackwood, B., Calandra, T., Chlan, L. L., Choong, K., Connolly, B., Dark, P., Ferrucci, L., Finfer, S., Girard, T. D., Hodgson, C., Hopkins, R. O., Hough, C. L., Jackson, J. C., Machado, F. R., Marshall, J. C., Misak, C., Needham, D. M., Panigrahi, P., Reinhart, K., Yende, S., Zafonte, R., Rowan, K. M., & Angus, D. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CH)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • National Health Service (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Brigham Young University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
  • Anesthesiology, Pain, and Intensive Care Department, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
  • St. Michael's Hospital (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Georgetown University Medical Center (US)
  • Jena University Hospital (DE)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre, London, United Kingdom
Corresponding author
Prescott, Hallie C.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2019-10
Volume
200
Issue
8
Pages
972-981
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2948089944
Cited by
166
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 2
FWCI
2.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (PDF-2015-08-015)
  • Queen's University Belfast
  • Queen's University
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1117230)
  • National Institute on Aging
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL135144)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM097471, K08GM115859)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Vitamin C and Antioxidants Research
Keywords
long-term recovery, neuropsychological deficits, physical disability, recurrent infections, acute kidney injury, cardiovascular events, cohort studies, phenotyping
MeSH terms
Survivorship, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Critical Care, Female, Persons with Disabilities, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Research Design, Cohort Studies, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Sepsis, Biomedical Research

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