SynthesisFrontiers in public health2026
Risk factors for sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to identify key risk factors for the incidence of sepsis through a systematic review and meta-analysis, thereby providing evidence-based medical evidence for its primary prevention and early identification. Methods: Systematic searches were conducted across eight Chinese and English databases (CNKI, Wanfang, SinoMed, VIP, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library) from their inception to January 2025. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis was then carried out using RevMan software. Effect sizes were pooled using either fixed- or random-effects models based on heterogeneity, and sensitivity analyses were performed for outcomes with high heterogeneity. Results: A total of 12,536 records were identified, and 23 studies met the eligibility criteria, of which 21 studies were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. The pooled analyses identified 19 significant factors associated with sepsis incidence, including 18 risk factors and 1 protective factor. The risk factors identified were: age (≥60 years and per-year increase), male sex, low BMI (≤18.5), Black race, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cancer, kidney disease, postoperative infection, ASA score >2, GCS score <8, ISS (per-point increase), loss of functional independence, steroid use, mechanical ventilation, history of hospitalization, history of emergency surgery, and previous history of sepsis. Antibiotic use was identified as a significant protective factor. Sensitivity analyses revealed that heterogeneity significantly decreased after excluding specific studies for age, diabetes, postoperative infection, and mechanical ventilation. Conclusion: This study provides a comprehensive review of risk factors for the incidence of sepsis. Correct identification of these risk factors and early implementation of interventions should be prioritized to reduce the incidence of sepsis.
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.