Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30484008›Full record

SynthesisNeurocritical care2019

A Systematic Review Assessing the Current State of Automated Pupillometry in the NeuroICU.

Stephen S Phillips, Claire M Mueller, Raul G Nogueira, Yousuf M Khalifa

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurocritical care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT04490005 completednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Outcome pRognostication of Acute Brain Injury With the NeuroloGical Pupil

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorUniversity of Milano BicoccaRan2020 to 2022Enrolled118ConditionsAcute Brain Injury, Pupillary Reflex ImpairedArmspupillometry
NCT05343988 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Percutaneous Neurostimulation for Treatment of Paroxysmal Sympathetic Hyperactivity in Children With Acute Severe Brain Injury

TypeinterventionalSponsorMedical College of WisconsinRan2022 to 2025Enrolled20ConditionsParoxysmal Sympathetic HyperactivityArmsPercutaneous Electrical Nerve Field Stimulation (PENFS) device application
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Evolving concepts in intracranial pressure monitoring - from traditional monitoring to precision medicine.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen S PhillipsEmory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Claire M MuellerEmory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Raul G NogueiraDepartment of Neurology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Yousuf M KhalifaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Emory University School of Medicine, 1648 Pierce Drive NE, Atlanta, GA, 30307, USA. Yousuf.khalifa@emoryhealthcare.org.
Emory University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the current state of automated pupillometry technology and its application in the neurointensive care unit (neuroICU). We performed a literature search using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases from database inception through a search end date of October 18, 2018, to identify studies reporting on the use of automated pupillometry in the care of critically ill patients with neurological impairment. Two independent reviewers reviewed all titles and abstracts in two filtering phases. Data were extracted independently. One hundred and forty-one articles/abstracts have been published on the use of automated pupillometry in critical care since inception of the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases. We selected and reviewed 22 full-text articles and 8 abstracts, of which 26 were prospective, 2 were retrospective, and 2 were larger case series. Automated pupillometry increased precision, reliability, and reproducibility compared with the manual pupillary examination; detected subtle and early pupillary changes; detected pupillary changes that indicate a rise, or impending rise, in intracranial pressure detected level of analgesia and depth of sedation; served as a prognostic indicator; estimated the clinical severity of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage; and served as a noninvasive monitor of response to osmotic therapy. At present, no consensus guidelines exist endorsing routine use of automated pupillometry in the neuroICU. However, an increasing quantity of research supports the usefulness of automated pupillometry in this setting. Further large-scale prospective studies are needed before updated consensus guidelines recommending widespread adoption of automated pupillometry are produced.

Indexed as

Critical CareNeurophysiological MonitoringDiagnostic Techniques, OphthalmologicalHumansReflex, PupillaryComputer-assistedDiagnosisDiagnostic techniquesMonitoringNeurological examinationOphthalmologicalPhysiologicPupillaryReflex

Identifiers

PMID30484008
OpenAlexW2902975920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.