ReviewJournal of anesthesia2016
Controversies in the temperature management of critically ill patients.
Review in Journal of anesthesia, 2016. 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, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heating and Cooling Rates With an Esophageal Heat Exchange System.Anesthesia and analgesia · 2018Trial
- Accuracy and Precision of Third-Generation Tympanic Thermometers With Varying Calibration Intervals: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study.Nursing research and practice · 2026Article
- Association between hypothermia and hyperthermia and 28-day mortality in pediatric intensive care unit patients: a retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes in critical patients undergoing different mechanical ventilation modes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Vital Sign Monitoring in Car Seats Based on Electrocardiography, Ballistocardiography and Seismocardiography: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Admission Body Temperature in Critically Ill Patients as an Independent Risk Predictor for Overall Outcome.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2020Article
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
Although body temperature is a classic primary vital sign, its value has received little attention compared with the others (blood pressure, heart rate, and respiratory rate). This may result from the fact that unlike the other primary vital signs, aging and diseases rarely affect the thermoregulatory system. Despite this, when humans are exposed to various anesthetics and analgesics and acute etiologies of non-infectious and infectious diseases in perioperative and intensive care settings, abnormalities may occur that shift body temperature up and down. A recent upsurge in clinical evidence in the perioperative and critical care field resulted in many clinical trials in temperature management. The results of these clinical trials suggest that aggressive body temperature modifications in comatose survivors after resuscitation from shockable rhythm, and permissive fever in critically ill patients, are carried out in critical care settings to improve patient outcomes; however, its efficacy remains to be elucidated. A recent, large multicenter randomized controlled trial demonstrated contradictory results, which may disrupt the trends in clinical practice. Thus, updated information concerning thermoregulatory interventions is essential for anesthesiologists and intensivists. Here, recent controversies in therapeutic hypothermia and fever management are summarized, and their relevance to the physiology of human thermoregulation is discussed.
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.