Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30828380›Full record

ReviewJournal of biological engineering2019

Current trends in biomarker discovery and analysis tools for traumatic brain injury.

Briana I Martinez, Sarah E Stabenfeldt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of biological engineering, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Dietary (Poly)phenols in Traumatic Brain Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Briana I Martinez1School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ USA.
Sarah E Stabenfeldt2School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering, Arizona State University, PO Box 879709, Tempe, AZ 85287-9709 USA.

Funding

Detecting and Treating Traumatic Brain Injury Pathology Progression from the Inside-OutDP2HD084067 · NICHD · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI STABENFELDT, SARAH E · 2014 to 2018
$2.8M
NICHD NIH HHS DP2 HD084067
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) affects 1.7 million people in the United States each year, causing lifelong functional deficits in cognition and behavior. The complex pathophysiology of neural injury is a primary barrier to developing sensitive and specific diagnostic tools, which consequentially has a detrimental effect on treatment regimens. Biomarkers of other diseases (e.g. cancer) have provided critical insight into disease emergence and progression that lend to developing powerful clinical tools for intervention. Therefore, the biomarker discovery field has recently focused on TBI and made substantial advancements to characterize markers with promise of transforming TBI patient diagnostics and care. This review focuses on these key advances in neural injury biomarkers discovery, including novel approaches spanning from omics-based approaches to imaging and machine learning as well as the evolution of established techniques.

Indexed as

BiomarkersImagingMachine learningOmicsPhage displayTraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID30828380
PMCPMC6381710

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.