ReviewCritical care (London, England)2015
Update on the role of extracorporeal CO₂ removal as an adjunct to mechanical ventilation in ARDS.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) in COPD and ARDS patients with severe hypercapnic respiratory failure. A retrospective case-control studyTurkish journal of medical sciences · 2021Article
- Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Annals of translational medicine · 2018Review
- Extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCOIntensive care medicine · 2017Review
- Management of severe traumatic brain injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome using pumped extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal device.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2017Article
- "Awake" extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): pathophysiology, technical considerations, and clinical pioneering.Critical care (London, England) · 2016Review
- Current Applications for the Use of Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal in Critically Ill Patients.BioMed research international · 2016Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2015 and co-published as a series in Critical Care. Other articles in the series can be found online at http://ccforum.com/series/annualupdate2015. Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901.
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.