Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25938029›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of critical care medicine2015

Designing drug regimens for special intensive care unit populations.

Brian L Erstad

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of critical care medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Brian L ErstadBrian L Erstad, Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University of Arizona College of Pharmacy, Tucson, AZ 85721-0207, United States.
University of Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review is intended to help clinicians design drug regimens for special populations of critically ill patients with extremes of body size, habitus and composition that make drug choice or dosing particularly challenging due to the lack of high-level evidence on which to make well-informed clinical decisions. The data sources included a literature search of MEDLINE and EMBASE with reviews of reference lists of retrieved articles. Abstracts of original research investigations and review papers were reviewed for their relevance to drug choice or dosing in the following special critically ill populations: patients with more severe forms of bodyweight or height, patients with amputations or missing limbs, pregnant patients, and patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or plasma exchange. Relevant papers were retrieved and evaluated, and their associated reference lists were reviewed for citations that may have been missed through the electronic search strategy. Relevant original research investigations and review papers that could be used to formulate general principles for drug choice or dosing in special populations of critically ill patients were extracted. Randomized studies with clinically relevant endpoints were not available for performing quantitative analyses. Critically ill patients with changes in body size, habitus and composition require special consideration when designing medication regimens, but there is a paucity of literature on which to make drug-specific, high-level evidence-based recommendations. Based on the evidence that is available, general recommendations are provided for drug choice or dosing in special critically ill populations.

Indexed as

Body compositionCritical careDrug dosage calculationsObesityPharmacokineticsPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID25938029
PMCPMC4411565
OpenAlexW2054475315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.