Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22668124›Full record

ReviewCNS drugs2012

A review of neuroprotection pharmacology and therapies in patients with acute traumatic brain injury.

Kevin W McConeghy, Jimmi Hatton, Lindsey Hughes, Aaron M Cook

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in CNS drugs, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 160 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kevin W McConeghyUK Healthcare Pharmacy Services, Lexington, KY, USA.
Jimmi Hatton
Lindsey Hughes
Aaron M Cook
University of Kentucky · USUniversity of Kentucky HealthCare · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) affects 1.6 million Americans annually. The injury severity impacts the overall outcome and likelihood for survival. Current treatment of acute TBI includes surgical intervention and supportive care therapies. Treatment of elevated intracranial pressure and optimizing cerebral perfusion are cornerstones of current therapy. These approaches do not directly address the secondary neurological sequelae that lead to continued brain injury after TBI. Depending on injury severity, a complex cascade of processes are activated and generate continued endogenous changes affecting cellular systems and overall outcome from the initial insult to the brain. Homeostatic cellular processes governing calcium influx, mitochondrial function, membrane stability, redox balance, blood flow and cytoskeletal structure often become dysfunctional after TBI. Interruption of this cascade has been the target of numerous pharmacotherapeutic agents investigated over the last two decades. Many agents such as selfotel, pegorgotein (PEG-SOD), magnesium, deltibant and dexanabinol were ineffective in clinical trials. While progesterone and ciclosporin have shown promise in phase II studies, success in larger phase III, randomized, multicentre, clinical trials is pending. Consequently, no neuroprotective treatment options currently exist that improve neurological outcome after TBI. Investigations to date have extended understanding of the injury mechanisms and sites for intervention. Examination of novel strategies addressing both pathological and pharmacological factors affecting outcome, employing novel trial design methods and utilizing biomarkers validated to be reflective of the prognosis for TBI will facilitate progress in overcoming the obstacles identified from previous clinical trials.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrain InjuriesClinical Trials as TopicHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicNeuroprotective AgentsPrognosisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicNeuroprotective Agents

Identifiers

PMID22668124
OpenAlexW2006925820

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.