ReviewIntensive care medicine2022
Challenging management dogma where evidence is non-existent, weak or outdated.
Review in Intensive care medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- IPNA's commitment to world kidney day 2026: caring for little kidneys and protecting the planet.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Infectious meningitis and encephalitis: A primer for acute care practitioners.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2026Review
- Philosophical and distinct SLE epitomes: dogmas in conflict with evidences and an intellectual dissonance between established pathophysiological models.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Challenging management dogma where evidence is non-existent, weak, or outdated: part II.Intensive care medicine · 2024Review
- Effects of correction rate for severe hyponatremia in the intensive care unit on patient outcomes.Journal of critical care · 2023Article
- Population Pharmacokinetics and Probability of Target Attainment Analysis of Nadroparin in Different Stages of COVID-19.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2023Article
- The challenge of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in ICU patients: anti-FXa activity does not constitute a simple solution.Intensive care medicine · 2022Article
- The challenge of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in ICU patients: anti-FXa activity does not constitute the simple solution. Author's reply.Intensive care medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical practice is dogged by dogma. A conclusive evidence base is lacking for many aspects of patient management. Clinicians, therefore, rely upon engrained treatment strategies as the dogma seems to work, or at least is assumed to do so. Evidence is often distorted, overlooked or misapplied in the re-telling. However, it is incorporated as fact in textbooks, policies, guidelines and protocols with resource and medicolegal implications. We provide here four examples of medical dogma that underline the above points: loop diuretic treatment for acute heart failure; the effectiveness of heparin thromboprophylaxis; the rate of sodium correction for hyponatraemia; and the mantra of "each hour counts" for treating meningitis. It is notable that the underpinning evidence is largely unsupportive of these doctrines. We do not necessarily advocate change, but rather encourage critical reflection on current practices and the need for prospective studies.
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.