ArticlePoint of care2012
Point-of-Care Testing at the Disaster-Emergency-Critical Care Interface.
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 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Point-of-care ultrasonography in Ukraine: a survey of anesthesiologists-intensivists participating in ultrasonography courses.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2024Article
- Article
- Validity of Urine NGALds Dipstick for Acute Kidney Injury in a Malawian Trauma Cohort.Kidney international reports · 2020Article
- Integrated microfluidic systems with sample preparation and nucleic acid amplification.Lab on a chip · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Point-of-care (POC) testing allows for medical testing to be performed across the disaster-emergency-critical care continuum. The disaster-emergency-critical care continuum begins with the identification of at-risk patients, followed by patient stabilization, and ultimately transfer to an alternate care facility or mobile hospital for comprehensive critical care. Gaps at the interfaces for each of these settings leads to excess mortality and morbidity. Disaster victims are at risk for acute myocardial infarctions, acute kidney injury (AKI), and sepsis. However cardiac biomarker testing, renal function testing, and multiplex rapid pathogen detection are often unavailable or inadequate during disasters. Cardiac biomarker reagents require refrigeration; traditional renal function tests (i.e., serum creatinine) exhibit poor sensitivity for predicting AKI in critically ill patients, and culture-based pathogen detection is too slow to help initiate early-directed antimicrobial therapy. We propose three value propositions detailing how rapid, POC, and environmentally hardened cardiac biomarker, AKI and multiplex pathogen testing harmonizes the interface between disaster, emergency, and critical care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.