Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16522266›Full record

ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2006

Controversies in the care of children with acute brain injury.

Steven Weinstein

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Steven WeinsteinDepartment of Neurology, Children's National Medical Center, 111 Michigan Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20010, USA. sweinste@cnmc.org
Children's National · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Care of children with acute brain injury is evolving from mere observation to active intervention that requires intensive care units focused on the nervous system primarily and other organs secondarily. The physical examination supplemented by neuroimaging, invasive monitoring, and an improved understanding of the mechanisms of injury allows for the development of rational therapies. This paper reviews common bedside controversies in care, including initial assessments and outcomes, as well as the prevention of secondary injury through the maintenance of brain oxygen and energy and the treatment of cerebral edema. The advantages and disadvantages of frequently utilized techniques are identified.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseBrain InjuriesCerebrovascular CirculationChildHumansIntracranial PressureNeurologic ExaminationRespiratory Physiological PhenomenaTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID16522266
OpenAlexW2004601284

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.