ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2016
[Severe pneumonia in the intensive care unit].
Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Syndromic molecular testing in mechanically ventilated patients with severe pneumonia: a supportive diagnostic approach.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of reduning injection for severe pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Impact of influenza virus infection on lung microbiome in adults with severe pneumonia.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2023Article
- Raman Spectroscopic Differentiation ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Article
- Article
- Comparative Efficacy of Chinese Herbal Injections for Treating Severe Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Ventilator for the management of patients with severe pneumonia: A protocol of systematic review.Medicine · 2020Article
- Community-Acquired Pneumonia-an Underestimated Challenge.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pneumonia has a high morbidity and mortality and is responsible for significant healthcare costs. In Germany, two evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of pneumonia are available: the S3 Guideline for Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of Adult Patients with Community-acquired Pneumonia and the S3 Guideline on Epidemiology, Diagnosis and Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia. On this basis, individualised patient management as shown in this article may be established.
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.