ArticleCritical care (London, England)2016
Hemodynamic monitoring in the era of evidence-based medicine.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of hemodynamic goal-directed resuscitation on mortality in adult critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2018Pooled it
- Clinical applications of blood gas analysis: a comparative review of arterial and venous blood gas monitoring in critical care.Acute and critical care · 2025Article
- Fluid Management, Intra-Abdominal Hypertension and the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome: A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Aiming for zero fluid accumulation: First, do no harm.Anaesthesiology intensive therapy · 2021Review
- A Bayesian Network Analysis of the Diagnostic Process and Its Accuracy to Determine How Clinicians Estimate Cardiac Function in Critically Ill Patients: Prospective Observational Cohort Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2019Article
- Perioperative goal-directed therapy: what's the best study design to investigate its impact on patient outcome?Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2019Article
- Principles of fluid management and stewardship in septic shock: it is time to consider the four D's and the four phases of fluid therapy.Annals of intensive care · 2018Review
- Advanced hemodynamic monitoring in intensive care medicine : A German web-based survey study.Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2018Article
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 at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemodynamic instability frequently occurs in critically ill patients. Pathophysiological rationale suggests that hemodynamic monitoring (HM) may identify the presence and causes of hemodynamic instability and therefore may allow targeting therapeutic approaches. However, there is a discrepancy between this pathophysiological rationale to use HM and a paucity of formal evidence (as defined by the strict criteria of evidence-based medicine (EBM)) for its use. In this editorial, we discuss that this paucity of formal evidence that HM can improve patient outcome may be explained by both the shortcomings of the EBM methodology in the field of intensive care medicine and the shortcomings of HM itself.
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.