Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23049469›Full record

ArticlePoint of care2012

Optimizing Global Resiliency in Public Health, Emergency Response, and Disaster Medicine.

Gerald J Kost, Corbin M Curtis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Point of care, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Gerald J KostUC Davis Point-of-Care Technologies Center and the POCT CTR, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of Medicine, UC Davis.
Corbin M Curtis

Funding

Rapid Multipathogen Detection for POCT and National Diaster ReadinessU54EB007959 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KOST, GERALD JOSEPH · 2007 to 2011
$8.5M
NIBIB NIH HHS U54 EB007959
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Resiliency through use of point-of-care (POC) testing in small-world networks will change the future landscape by bringing evidence-based decision-making to sites of need globally. This issue of Point of Care addresses fundamental principles and essential building blocks that mitigate crises and enhance standards of care. Several papers on needs assessment support the case for onsite testing in different medical situations. Then, the focus shifts to how to protect POC devices and reagents from extremes of temperature and humidity that are encountered virtually anywhere POC testing is used outside hospitals. Indeed, the effects of environmental stresses can no longer be ignored. We have observed the advent of the "hybrid laboratory" where POC whole-blood analysis is performed using transportable instruments in non-laboratory settings and the rapid expansion of portable and handheld testing now found ubiquitously worldwide. Emerging new POC technologies will propel personalized medicine by targeting treatment. Trendy as these advances are, in low-resource settings POC instruments often represent the default armamentarium of the small community hospital. Hence, education and competency become essential prerequisites for creating, maintaining, harmonizing, and standardizing accuracy and quality as new cost-effective technologies become available. Excellent performance brings value, which is one of the keys to this next phase in the history of point of care. By increasing the value of decision-making at the site of care, we can assure resiliency, for the individual patient who might be in need of self-monitoring, for rational responses to crises, and for nations made up of more resilient individual communities.

Identifiers

PMID23049469
PMCPMC3462020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.