Current and emerging therapeutic options for refractory septic shock: A systematic review

Table 1 Risk of bias assessment

Ref.	Randomization process	Deviations from intended interventions	Missing outcome data	Measurement of outcomes	Selection of the reported results	Overall risk of bias
Lyu et al[15], 2022	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Ibarra-Estrada et al[16], 2023	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Hajjar et al[17], 2019	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Moskowitz et al[18], 2020	Low risk	Some concerns	Low risk	Low risk	Some concerns	Some concerns
Fujii et al[19], 2020	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns
Sevransky et al[20], 2021	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Wang et al[21], 2022	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns
Cherukuri et al[22], 2019	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Douglas et al[23], 2020	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Morelli et al[24], 2008	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns
Albanèse et al[25], 2005	Low risk	High Risk	Some concerns	High Risk	High Risk	High Risk
Hyvernat et al[26], 2016	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Annane et al[27], 2002	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk
Liu et al[28], 2018	Some concerns	Low risk	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns
Xiao et al[29], 2016	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns	Some concerns