Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33335072›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical ethics2021

Using a biomarker acutely to identify babies at risk of serious adverse effects from antibiotics: where is the 'Terrible Moral and Medical Dilemma'?

Anneke M Lucassen, John Henry McDermott, William Newman

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 73% 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anneke M LucassenCELS, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK a.m.lucassen@soton.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3324-4338
John Henry McDermottManchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5220-8837
William NewmanManchester Centre for Genomic Medicine, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6382-4678
University of Manchester · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Department of Health II-LB-0417-20002Wellcome Trust 208053/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We thank Parker and Wright for engaging in this roundtable debate in such a spirited way. The 'Pharmacogenetic [test] to Avoid Loss of Hearing' (PALOH) Trial is the first time a genetic point of care test has been applied in the acute neonatal setting; therefore, it is not surprising that questions have been raised which require debate, discussion and clarification. Parker and Wright misattribute several assumptions to the roundtable authors, which we would like to clarify here. Since they raise wider questions about the PALOH trial itself, several of the roundtable discussants have made a joint response.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsMoralsBiomarkersGenetic TestingHumansInfantInfant, NewbornAnti-Bacterial AgentsBiomarkersgenethicsgenetic informationhuman tissueminors/parental consentresearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID33335072
OpenAlexW3112251723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.