Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19565024›Full record

ArticleThe Clinical biochemist. Reviews2009

The Stewart approach--one clinician's perspective.

T John Morgan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Clinical biochemist. Reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Arterial Blood Gas Analysis: A New Look at the Old Formula.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Modeling acid-base balance during continuous kidney replacement therapy.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Quantifying HPhysiological reports · 2021
    Article
  20. Arterial Blood Gas: Bowling Wide and Poor Wicketkeeping.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2021
    Article
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.

T John MorganIntensive Care Unit, Mater Adult Hospital, Mater Health Services, South Brisbane, Qld 4101, Australia. john.morgan@mater.org.au

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Peter Stewart added controversy to an already troubled subject when he entered the clinical acid-base arena. His approach puts water dissociation at the centre of the acid-base status of body fluids. It is based on six simultaneous equations, incorporating the Laws of Mass Action, Mass Conservation, and Electrical Neutrality. Together with Gibbs-Donnan equilibria, these equations explain the diagnostically important PaCO(2)/pH relationship, and improve understanding of the physiologic basis of traditional acid-base approaches. Spin-offs have included new scanning tools for unmeasured ions, in particular the 'strong ion gap' and 'net unmeasured ions'. The most controversial feature is the designation of pH and bicarbonate concentrations as dependent variables, answerable exclusively to three independent variables. These are the strong ion difference (SID), the total concentration of non-volatile weak acid (A(TOT)), and PCO(2). Aspects of this assertion conflict with traditional renal physiology, and with current models of membrane H(+)/base transporters, oxidative phosphorylation, and proton and bicarbonate ionophores. The debate in this area is ongoing. Meanwhile, Stewart-style diagnostic and decision support systems such as the 'Strong Ion Calculator' and the web-site www.acidbase.org are now appearing.

Identifiers

PMID19565024
PMCPMC2702213

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.