ArticleInfection2026
Long-term outcomes after intensive care unit-treated COVID-19, influenza and respiratory sepsis in 2020 - a comparative, population-based cohort study.
Article in Infection, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSepsis survivors are affected by a broad spectrum of long-term impairments, which overlap with Long-Covid and sequelae after influenza in their clinical presentation. However, we lack comparative assessments on the burden of long-term outcomes, particularly with patients being recruited from the same, contemporary patient population. Therefore we compared long-term outcomes after respiratory sepsis (RS), SARS-CoV-2-associated sepsis (SS) and influenza-associated sepsis (IS).
methodsRetrospective, population-based cohort study. We included patients > 15 years hospitalized with RS, SS and IS between 01/2020 and 12/2020 in Germany, who received intensive care unit treatment. We compared mortality, readmissions, prevalence of diagnoses in the cognitive, psychological or medical domain, and the number of impaired domains in the 12 months post-discharge between the three survivor cohorts, adjusting for between-group differences in relevant covariates by inverse propensity score weighting based on generalized propensity scores.
resultsOur study included 12,854 patients, of which 8,201 were RS, 3,964 SS and 689 IS survivors. RS survivors had a considerably higher risk for 12-month mortality compared to SS and IS survivors (relative risk, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.54-2.03]; P < 0.001 and relative risk, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.14-1.65]; P = 0.001, respectively). They were more often rehospitalized, affected by multiple domain impairments, cognitive decline and impairments related to the severity of acute disease, e.g. complications of the tracheostoma, compared to survivors after SS and IS. RS survivors had a lower risk for being affected by medical diagnoses compared to SS. Risks for psychological diagnoses did not differ between RS and the other survivor groups.
conclusionsAlthough respiratory sepsis survivors seem to be affected by more severe long-term impairments, the overall burden of post-acute sequelae among all survivor groups is high. This warrants efforts to provide targeted aftercare for all survivor populations after life-threatening infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.