ReviewCureus2024
A Comprehensive Review and Practical Guide of the Applications of Evoked Potentials in Neuroprognostication After Cardiac Arrest.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiorespiratory arrest is a very common cause of morbidity and mortality nowadays, and many therapeutic strategies, such as induced coma or targeted temperature management, are used to reduce patient sequelae. However, these procedures can alter a patient's neurological status, making it difficult to obtain useful clinical information for the reliable estimation of neurological prognosis. Therefore, complementary investigations are conducted in the early stages after a cardiac arrest to clarify functional prognosis in comatose cardiac arrest survivors in the first few hours or days. Current practice relies on a multimodal approach, which shows its greatest potential in predicting poor functional prognosis, whereas the data and tools to identify patients with good functional prognosis remain relatively limited in comparison. Therefore, there is considerable interest in investigating alternative biological parameters and advanced imaging technique studies. Among these, somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) remain one of the simplest and most reliable tools. In this article, we discuss the technical principles, advantages, limitations, and prognostic implications of SSEPs in detail. We will also review other types of evoked potentials that can provide useful information but are less commonly used in clinical practice (e.g., visual evoked potentials; short-, medium-, and long-latency auditory evoked potentials; and event-related evoked potentials, such as mismatch negativity or P300).
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.