ReviewNeurocritical care2015
Data collection and interpretation.
Review in Neurocritical care, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Moving from bytes to bedside: a systematic review on the use of artificial intelligence in the intensive care unit.Intensive care medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Accuracy of Manual Intracranial Pressure Recording Compared to a Computerized High-Resolution System: A CENTER-TBI Analysis.Neurocritical care · 2023Article
- Chinese experts' consensus on the application of intensive care big data.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Precision Care in Cardiac Arrest: ICECAP (PRECICECAP) Study Protocol and Informatics Approach.Neurocritical care · 2022Article
- Prolonged Automated Robotic TCD Monitoring in Acute Severe TBI: Study Design and Rationale.Neurocritical care · 2022Observational
- Big data and predictive analytics in neurocritical care.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2022Review
- Neonatal NIRS monitoring: recommendations for data capture and review of analytics.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2021Review
- Current Status and Future Directions of Neuromonitoring With Emerging Technologies in Neonatal Care.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Review
- "Usability of data integration and visualization software for multidisciplinary pediatric intensive care: a human factors approach to assessing technology".BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Patient monitoring is routinely performed in all patients who receive neurocritical care. The combined use of monitors, including the neurologic examination, laboratory analysis, imaging studies, and physiological parameters, is common in a platform called multi-modality monitoring (MMM). However, the full potential of MMM is only beginning to be realized since for the most part, decision making historically has focused on individual aspects of physiology in a largely threshold-based manner. The use of MMM now is being facilitated by the evolution of bio-informatics in critical care including developing techniques to acquire, store, retrieve, and display integrated data and new analytic techniques for optimal clinical decision making. In this review, we will discuss the crucial initial steps toward data and information management, which in this emerging era of data-intensive science is already shifting concepts of care for acute brain injury and has the potential to both reshape how we do research and enhance cost-effective clinical 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.