Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 520

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A robust scoring system to evaluate sepsis severity in an animal model

Open access
Shrum, Bradly, Anantha, Ram V, Xu, Stacey X, Donnelly, Marisa, Haeryfar, SM Mansour, McCormick, John K, Mele, Tina·2014·BMC Research Notes

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The lack of a reliable scoring system that predicts the development of septic shock and death precludes comparison of disease and/or treatment outcomes in animal models of sepsis. We developed a murine sepsis score (MSS) that evaluates seven clinical variables, and sought to assess its validity and reliability in an experimental mouse model of polymicrobial sepsis. METHODS: Stool collected from the cecum of C57BL/6 (B6) mice was dissolved in 0.9% normal saline (NS) and filtered, resulting in a fecal solution (FS) which was injected intraperitoneally into B6 mice. Disease severity was monitored by MSS during the experimental timeline. Blood and tissue samples were harvested for the evaluation of inflammatory changes after sepsis induction. The correlation between pro-inflammatory markers and MSS was assessed by the Spearman rank correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Mice injected with FS at a concentration of 90 mg/mL developed polymicrobial sepsis with a 75% mortality rate at 24 hours. The MSS was highly predictive of sepsis progression and mortality, with excellent discriminatory power, high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha coefficient = 0.92), and excellent inter-rater reliability (intra-class coefficient = 0.96). An MSS of 3 had a specificity of 100% for predicting onset of septic shock and death within 24 hours. Hepatic dysfunction and systemic pro-inflammatory responses were confirmed by biochemical and cytokine analyses where the latter correlated well with the MSS. Significant bacterial dissemination was noted in multiple organs. Furthermore, the liver, spleen, and intestine demonstrated histopathological evidence of injury. CONCLUSIONS: The MSS reliably predicts disease progression and mortality in an animal model of polymicrobial sepsis. More importantly, it may be used to assess and compare outcomes among various experimental models of sepsis, and serve as an ethically acceptable alternative to death as an endpoint.

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 · 10.1186/1756-0500-7-233

Cites

37 of 37 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

Show all 37 references

Cited by

See all 520

Metadata

Authors
Shrum, B., Anantha, R. V., Xu, S. X., Donnelly, M., Haeryfar, S. M., McCormick, J. K., & Mele, T.
Venue
BMC Research Notes
Published
2014-04-12
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
233-233
ISSN
1756-0500 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2036607436
Cited by
520
References
37
FWCI
7.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: A robust scoring system to evaluate sepsis severity in an animal model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1756-0500-7-233
The paper
Shrum, B., Anantha, R. V., Xu, S. X., Donnelly, M., Haeryfar, S. M., McCormick, J. K., & Mele, T. (2014). A robust scoring system to evaluate sepsis severity in an animal model. BMC Research Notes. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-233

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.