ReviewJournal of the American College of Cardiology2023
Research Priorities in Critical Care Cardiology: JACC Expert Panel.
Review in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Corticosteroid use and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Mixed and Cardiogenic Shock.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Variation in Vasoactive Treatment Selection for Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN).Circulation. Heart failure · 2026Article
- Low central venous oxygen saturation on critical care unit admission is associated with higher in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients with acute myocardial infarction.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Cumulative Vulnerability in Cardiac Critical Care: A Framework for Understanding Healthcare-Associated Infections and Their Progression to Severe Infection and Sepsis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Cardiogenic Shock and the Role of Critical Care Cardiology: Evidence, Models of Care, and Future Directions.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Review
- Triglyceride-glucose index correlates with all-cause mortality of patients in intensive cardiac care unit: from two large-scale cohorts.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Respiratory Support and Mortality Risk Across the Spectrum of Cardiogenic Shock Severity.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- Myocarditis-Associated Cardiogenic Shock: A Nationwide Multicenter Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Management Patterns and Outcomes of Invasive Mechanical Ventilation in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- In-Hospital Mortality Risk Among Transfers to Cardiac Intensive Care Units.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Moving From the Epidemiology to the Treatment of Respiratory Failure in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- The Role of Impella in Cardiogenic Shock in the Post-DanGer Shock Era.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Evolution of Critical Care Cardiology: An Update on Structure, Care Delivery, Training, and Research Paradigms: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2025Article
- Underrepresentation and exclusion of patients with cardiovascular disease in intensive care randomized controlled trials.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2025Article
- Review
- Acute Decompensated Valvular Disease in the Intensive Care Unit.JACC. Advances · 2024Review
- Epidemiology of cardiogenic shock using the Shock Academic Research Consortium (SHARC) consensus definitions.European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care · 2024Article
- Early Serial Assessment of Aggregate Vasoactive Support and Mortality in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry.Circulation. Heart failure · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the last several decades, the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) has seen a substantial evolution in the patient population, comorbidities, and diagnoses. However, the generation of high-quality evidence to manage these complex and critically ill patients has been slow. Given the scarcity of clinical trials focused on critical care cardiology (CCC), CICU clinicians are often left to extrapolate from studies that either exclude or poorly represent the patient population admitted to CICUs. The lack of high-quality evidence and limited guidance from society guidelines has led to significant variation in practice patterns for many of the most common CICU diagnoses. Several barriers, both common to critical care research and unique to CCC, have impeded progress. In this multinational perspective, we describe key areas of priority for CCC research, current challenges for investigation in the CICU, and essential elements of a path forward for the field.
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.