Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24778096›Full record

ReviewCroatian medical journal2014

Markers for sepsis diagnosis in the forensic setting: state of the art.

Cristian Palmiere, Marc Augsburger

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Croatian medical journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2020
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Cristian PalmiereCristian Palmiere, cristian.palmiere@chuv.ch, University Center of Legal Medicine, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Marc Augsburger

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reliable diagnoses of sepsis remain challenging in forensic pathology routine despite improved methods of sample collection and extensive biochemical and immunohistochemical investigations. Macroscopic findings may be elusive and have an infectious or non-infectious origin. Blood culture results can be difficult to interpret due to postmortem contamination or bacterial translocation. Lastly, peripheral and cardiac blood may be unavailable during autopsy. Procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, and interleukin-6 can be measured in biological fluids collected during autopsy and may be used as in clinical practice for diagnostic purposes. However, concentrations of these parameters may be increased due to etiologies other than bacterial infections, indicating that a combination of biomarkers could more effectively discriminate non-infectious from infectious inflammations. In this article, we propose a review of the literature pertaining to the diagnostic performance of classical and novel biomarkers of inflammation and bacterial infection in the forensic setting.

Indexed as

Forensic PathologyAutopsyBacteremiaBiomarkersHumansBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID24778096
PMCPMC4009711

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.