Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34562909›Full record

ReviewBiosensors2021

The Current State of Traumatic Brain Injury Biomarker Measurement Methods.

Alyse D Krausz, Frederick K Korley, Mark A Burns

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Biosensors, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Traumatic Brain Injury Biomarkers, Simulations and Kinetics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

3 authors.

Alyse D KrauszBiomedical Engineering Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8045-1623
Frederick K KorleyEmergency Medicine, Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
Mark A BurnsBiomedical Engineering Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.

Funding

Precision Health at the University of Michigan Scholars Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality partially due to the limited tools available for diagnosis and classification. Measuring panels of protein biomarkers released into the bloodstream after injury has been proposed to diagnose TBI, inform treatment decisions, and monitor the progression of the injury. Being able to measure these protein biomarkers at the point-of-care would enable assessment of TBIs from the point-of-injury to the patient's hospital bedside. In this review, we provide a detailed discussion of devices reported in the academic literature and available on the market that have been designed to measure TBI protein biomarkers in various biofluids and contexts. We also assess the challenges associated with TBI biomarker measurement devices and suggest future research directions to encourage translation of these devices to clinical use.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBrain Injuries, TraumaticHumansBiomarkersbiomarkerselectrochemical detectionimmunosensorsmicrofluidicsoptical detectiontraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID34562909
PMCPMC8469272

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.