ArticleBulletin of emergency and trauma2019
Biomarkers in Shock Patients and Their Value as A Prognostic Tool; A Prospective Multi-Center Cohort Study.
Article in Bulletin of emergency and trauma, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic value of capillary refill time in adult patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Sigmoid Volvulus in the Setting of Type 4 Hiatal Hernia: An Uncommon Presentation and Literature Review.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the prognostic value of clinical and laboratory tests in prediction of outcome in patients at day 30 post presentation to hospital with shock and to determine the prognostic value of mid regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM) on mortality prediction at 30 days in the same patient cohort.
methodThis prospective multicenter cohort study analyzed data from patients who had presenting with shock to the emergency departments of eleven urban, tertiary-care University hospitals in Spain between March, 2011 and May, 2011. Recruitment of patients was via convenience sampling. Inclusion criteria included age between 14 and 100 years with clinical diagnostic criteria of shock on admission. Various patient parameters were analysed, such as age, sex, past medical history. Other clinical variables were measured on arrival to hospital, including sequential organ failure assessment score (score SOFA), blood pressure, oxygen saturations, capillary refill time and shock index (SI). Laboratory variables investigated included base excess, MR-proADM, lactate, C-Reactive Protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT).
resultsThere were 212 patients included in the study from the eleven hospitals involved. The mean age was 72.2 years old and 60.4% of the patients were men. In the discriminant analysis only age, MR-proADM and PCT remained in the final discriminant equation. The separate analysis of MR-proADM showed that, in the non-survivors group, MR-proADM levels are significantly higher than those found in the group of survivors (
conclusionAge, PCT and MR-proADM were useful to predict short-term mortality in patients presenting to the emergency department shock. This suggests that PCT and MR-proADM in combination with the most common prediction models will improve prognostic value.
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.