Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27708836›Full record

ReviewMilitary Medical Research2016

Pathophysiology of sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction.

Xiuxiu Lv, Huadong Wang

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Military Medical Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 126 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
126citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

126 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 214 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Septic cardiomyopathy: Fact or fiction?American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

66 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiuxiu LvDepartment of Pathophysiology, Key Laboratory of State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine of the People's Republic of China, School of Medicine, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510632 China.
Huadong WangDepartment of Pathophysiology, Key Laboratory of State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine of the People's Republic of China, School of Medicine, Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong 510632 China.
Jinan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction is a common complication in septic patients and is associated with increased mortality. In the clinical setting, it was once believed that myocardial dysfunction was not a major pathological process in the septic patients, at least in part, due to the unavailability of suitable clinical markers to assess intrinsic myocardial function during sepsis. Although sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction has been studied in clinical and basic research for more than 30 years, its pathophysiology is not completely understood, and no specific therapies for this disorder exist. The purpose of this review is to summarize our current knowledge of sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction with a special focus on pathogenesis and clinical characteristics.

Indexed as

CardiomyopathiesSepsisBiomarkersBlood PressureCalciumElectrocardiographyHeartHumansNatriuretic Peptide, BrainBiomarkersCalciumNatriuretic Peptide, BrainClinical manifestationMyocardial dysfunctionPathogenesisSepsis

Identifiers

PMID27708836
PMCPMC5037896
OpenAlexW2520610051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.