Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22349473›Full record

ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2012

[Cardiac biomarkers in the critically ill].

S Reith, N Marx

Erratum issuedAbstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

S ReithMedizinische Klinik I, Klinik für Kardiologie, Angiologie, Pneumologie und Internistische Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Pauwelsstr. 30, 52074, Aachen, Deutschland. sreith@ukaachen.de
N Marx

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cardiac biomarkers in intensive care medicine are an excellent complement to existing clinical and diagnostic information in specific diseases. Due to their lack of specificity, the diagnostic properties of common cardiac biomarkers, such as natriuretic peptides and cardiac troponins, remain ambiguous, while their prognostic value has already been proven. In addition, there are several promising new biomarkers that might contribute to a "multimarker strategy" in the critically ill patient in the future, but further evaluation is still required.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessBiomarkersCreatine Kinase, MB FormHeart FailureHumansIntensive Care UnitsMyocardial IschemiaNatriuretic Peptide, BrainNatriuretic PeptidesPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructivePulmonary EdemaPulmonary EmbolismSensitivity and SpecificityShock, CardiogenicBiomarkersCreatine Kinase, MB FormNatriuretic Peptide, BrainNatriuretic PeptidesTroponinTroponin C

Identifiers

PMID22349473

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.