Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19216724›Full record

ReviewCritical care (London, England)2009

Bench-to-bedside review: ventilatory abnormalities in sepsis.

Sheldon Magder

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Critical care (London, England), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Respiratory distress in the newborn.Pediatrics in review · 2014
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Sepsis: from pattern to mechanism and back.Critical reviews in biomedical engineering · 2012
    Review
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.

Sheldon MagderDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Sheldon.magder@mcgill.ca

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In septic patients increased central drive and increased metabolic demands combine to increase energy demands on the ventilatory muscles. This occurs at a time when energy supplies are limited and energy production hindered, and it leads to an energy supply-demand imbalance and often ventilatory failure. Problems related to contractile function of the ventilatory muscles also contribute, especially when the clinical course is prolonged. The increased ventilatory activity increases interactions between the ventilatory and cardiovascular systems, and when ventilatory muscles fail and mechanical ventilatory support is required a new set of problems emerges. In this review I discuss factors related to ventilatory muscle failure, giving emphasis to mechanical and supply demand aspects. I also review the implications of changes in ventilatory patterns for heart-lung interactions.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsBiomedical ResearchHumansRespiration, ArtificialRespiration DisordersRespiratory MechanicsRespiratory MusclesSepsis

Identifiers

PMID19216724
PMCPMC2688092

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.