Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23016869›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2012

Erythropoietin in the critically ill: do we ask the right questions?

Oscar McCook, Michael Georgieff, Angelika Scheuerle, Peter Möller, Christoph Thiemermann, Peter Radermacher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. HJournal of clinical medicine · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Oscar McCook
Michael Georgieff
Angelika Scheuerle
Peter Möller
Christoph Thiemermann
Peter Radermacher
University Hospital Ulm · DEWilliam Harvey Research Institute · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a plethora of experimental data on the potential therapeutic benefits of recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO) and its synthetic derivatives in critical care medicine, in particular in ischemia/reperfusion injury. Most of the recent clinical trials have not shown clear benefits, and, in some patients, EPO-aggravated morbidity and mortality was even reported. Treatment with rhEPO has been successfully used in patients with anemia resulting from chronic kidney disease, but even a subset of this patient population does not adequately respond to rhEPO therapy. The following viewpoint uses rhEPO as an example to highlight the possible pitfalls in current practice using young healthy animals for the evaluation of therapies to treat patients of variable age and underlying chronic co-morbidity.

Indexed as

Acute Kidney InjuryAnimalsClinical Trials as TopicCritical IllnessDrug ResistanceErythropoietinHumansModels, AnimalRecombinant ProteinsRenal Insufficiency, ChronicReperfusion InjuryErythropoietinRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID23016869
PMCPMC3682241
OpenAlexW2011606101

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.