ReviewCritical care (London, England)2017
Personalized physiological medicine.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of postoperative goal-directed therapy in cancer patients undergoing high-risk surgery: a randomized clinical trial and meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2018Trial
- Physiology, monitoring, and optimisation of perioperative tissue oxygenation: a narrative review.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Review
- Albumin Enhances Microvascular Reactivity in Sepsis: Insights from Near-Infrared Spectroscopy and Vascular Occlusion Testing.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Multimodal Prehabilitation in Major Abdominal Surgery-Rationale, Modalities, Results and Limitations.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- How we could use critical care echocardiography in the assessment of and management of cardiovascular phenotypes in septic shock: the good, the bad, and the ugly profiles.Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
- Hemoglobin signal network mapping reveals novel indicators for precision medicine.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Multi-Omics Endotypes in ICU Sepsis-Induced Immunosuppression.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Mortality Risks after Two Years in Frail and Pre-Frail Older Adults Admitted to Hospital.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- From numbers to medical knowledge: harnessing combinatorial data patterns to predict COVID-19 resource needs and distinguish patient subsets.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Pathophysiology of fluid administration in critically ill patients.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2022Review
- Personalized Physiological Medicine as the Future of Intensive Care Medicine.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2022Article
- Mid-Regional Proadrenomedullin (MR-proADM) and Microcirculation in Monitoring Organ Dysfunction of Critical Care Patients With Infection: A Prospective Observational Pilot Study.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- [Evaluation of the microcirculation in critically ill patients : Relevance, practical possibilities and scientific evidence].Der Anaesthesist · 2020Review
- Hemodynamic Predictors for Sepsis-Induced Acute Kidney Injury: A Preliminary Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Exploration of Different Rehabilitation Routes for Sepsis Survivors with Monitoring of Health Status and Quality of Life: RehaSep Trial Protocol.Advances in therapy · 2019Observational
- Initial Fluid Resuscitation Following Adjusted Body Weight Dosing in Sepsis and Septic Shock.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2019Article
- Physiology and technology for the ICU in vivo.Critical care (London, England) · 2019Review
- Assessment of Regional Perfusion and Organ Function: Less and Non-invasive Techniques.Frontiers in medicine · 2019Review
- Intensive care medicine in 2050: the ICU in vivo.Intensive care medicine · 2017Article
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
This paper introduces the concept of personalized physiological medicine that is specifically directed at the needs of the critically ill patient. This differs from the conventional view of personalized medicine, characterized by biomarkers and gene profiling, instead focusing on time-variant changes in the pathophysiology and regulation of various organ systems and their cellular and subcellular constituents. I propose that personalized physiological medicine is composed of four pillars relevant to the critically ill patient. Pillar 1 is defined by the frailty and fitness of the patient and their physiological reserve to cope with the stress of critical illness and therapy. Pillar 2 involves monitoring of the key physiological variables of the different organ systems and their response to disease and therapy. Pillar 3 concerns the evaluation of the success of resuscitation by assessment of the hemodynamic coherence between the systemic and microcirculation and parenchyma of the organ systems. Finally, pillar 4 is defined by the integration of the physiological and clinical data into a time-learning adaptive model of the patient to provide feedback about the function of organ systems and to guide and assess the response to disease and therapy. I discuss each pillar and describe the challenges to research and development that will allow the realization of personalized physiological medicine to be practiced at the bedside for critically ill patients.
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.