ReviewFolia microbiologica2019
Recommendations for cerebrospinal fluid analysis.
Review in Folia microbiologica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cerebrospinal Fluid-Basic Concepts Review.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- The Biosafety and Risk Management in Preparation and Processing of Cerebrospinal Fluid and Other Neurological Specimens With Potential Coronavirus Infection.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Review
- Review
- Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF) Analysis and Interpretation in Neurocritical Care for Acute Neurological Conditions.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diseases of the central nervous system (CNS) mean for the human organism a potentially dangerous situation. An investigation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) provides important information about a character of CNS impairment in the decision-making diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm. The authors present a brief overview of available cerebrospinal fluid assays, shortened indication criteria, a recommended algorithm of CSF assessment in different suspected diseases, and a view of the external quality system. The whole portfolio of obtainable CSF methodology is further subdivided according to the adequate choice into the first and inevitable basic routine panel, and following complicated analyses of highly specialized character. The basic panel is considered for standard laboratories, the complete specialized assessment should be provided by a super-consulting laboratory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30552580What 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.