ReviewJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2018
Quantitative measures of EEG for prediction of outcome in cardiac arrest subjects treated with hypothermia: a literature review.
Review in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2018. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostication after cardiac arrest: how EEG and evoked potentials may improve the challenge.Annals of intensive care · 2022Review
- Recent applications of quantitative electroencephalography in adult intensive care units: a comprehensive review.Journal of neurology · 2022Review
- SSEP N20 and P25 amplitudes predict poor and good neurologic outcomes after cardiac arrest.Annals of intensive care · 2022Article
- Predicting early recovery of consciousness after cardiac arrest supported by quantitative electroencephalography.Resuscitation · 2021Observational
- Value of Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Tensor Imaging Combined with Quantitative Electroencephalogram in Diagnosis of Neurocognitive Impairment in Patients with White Matter Demyelination.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2021Article
- Neurological Monitoring and Complications of Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support.Pediatric neurology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cardiac arrest (CA) is the leading cause of death and disability in the United States. Early and accurate prediction of CA outcome can help clinicians and families to make a better-informed decision for the patient's healthcare. Studies have shown that electroencephalography (EEG) may assist in early prognosis of CA outcome. However, visual EEG interpretation is subjective, labor-intensive, and requires interpretation by a medical expert, i.e., neurophysiologists. These limiting factors may hinder the applicability of such testing as the prognostic method in clinical settings. Automatic EEG pattern recognition using quantitative measures can make the EEG analysis more objective and less time consuming. It also allows to detect and display hidden patterns that may be useful for the prognosis over longer time periods of monitoring. Given these potential benefits, there have been an increasing interest over the last few years in the development and employment of EEG quantitative measures to predict CA outcome. This paper extensively reviews the definition and efficacy of various measures that have been employed for the prediction of outcome in CA subjects undergoing hypothermia (a neuroprotection method that has become a standard of care to improve the functional recovery of CA patients after resuscitation). The review details the State-of-the-Art and provides some perspectives on what seems to be promising for the early and accurate prognostication of CA outcome using the quantitative measures of EEG.
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.