ReviewInfection2026
Gut microbiota dysbiosis in patients with sepsis: a meta-analysis of microbial diversity and taxonomic abundance.
Review 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGut microbiota alterations are frequently reported in sepsis, but their magnitude, consistency, and clinical specificity remain uncertain. We evaluated microbial diversity and taxonomic abundance in patients with sepsis, distinguishing healthy/reference controls from nonseptic clinical comparators.
methodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched from inception to 20 September 2026, without language or geographic restrictions, supplemented by targeted retrieval of primary studies and supplementary data. Comparative human observational studies were included. Standardized mean differences (Hedges g) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using random-effects models. Healthy/reference and nonseptic clinical controls were analyzed separately. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity and assess the stability of pooled estimates. Small-study effect tests and meta-regression were restricted to outcomes with sufficient studies.
resultsTwenty-three studies comprising 1201 participants were included. Compared with healthy/reference controls, patients with sepsis had lower Shannon diversity (20 studies; g = - 1.12, 95% CI - 1.38 to - 0.85; I² = 59.9%) and lower Firmicutes abundance (g = - 0.78, 95% CI - 1.32 to - 0.24), but higher Proteobacteria (g = 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.25) and Enterococcus abundance (g = 0.68, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.98). These associations remained statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons. Estimates for the remaining outcomes were less consistent or imprecise. The reduction in Shannon diversity was smaller against nonseptic clinical controls (eight studies; g = - 0.29, 95% CI - 0.54 to - 0.05) and was not statistically significant after multiplicity correction.
conclusionsSepsis was associated with reduced gut microbial diversity and alterations in selected bacterial taxa, most consistently in comparisons with healthy/reference controls. Clinical heterogeneity and incomplete control of antibiotic exposure and illness severity limit attribution of these changes to sepsis itself. Prospective studies are needed to establish their prognostic and therapeutic relevance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42862471What 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.