ReviewNature reviews. Nephrology2025
Sepsis criteria and kidney function: eliminating sex, age and economic status biases.
Review in Nature reviews. Nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Top ten tips to manage patients after acute kidney injury.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- The global epidemiology of acute kidney injury: challenges and opportunities.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2026Review
- Sepsis in multimorbidity: a domain-based framework for systemic vulnerability and precision care.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Integrated multi-omics of mitophagy-related molecular subtype characterization and biomarker identification in sepsis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The kidney is a target organ for the dysregulated host response to infection that defines sepsis, and acute kidney injury (AKI) is often an early manifestation of this response. Current sepsis criteria for adults (Sepsis-3) continue to include outmoded measures of kidney health, such as absolute creatinine values, which are used in organ failure scoring independently of baseline kidney function or treatment with dialysis. This approach perpetuates disparities, as older female patients require much larger decreases in kidney function compared with young male patients to achieve the same 'renal domain' points, exacerbating sex- and age-based inequities in health assessment and response. Furthermore, the latest data-driven machine learning-assisted paediatric sepsis criteria (the Phoenix Sepsis Score) have excluded kidney function entirely from sepsis diagnosis. Consequently, these criteria will exclude a child with pneumonia and associated AKI, even if receiving dialysis, from a sepsis diagnosis unless other organs fail. This inconsistency, given the extensive refinement and validation of AKI diagnostic criteria over the past three decades, is unacceptable. Current criteria for diagnosis of sepsis in both adults and children fail to incorporate crucial advances in the diagnosis of kidney disease. We maintain that it is imperative that kidney injury is quantified accurately in sepsis scoring systems free of sex, race and other biases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40506504What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.