ArticleScientific reports2024
Identification and characterization of critical values in therapeutic drug monitoring: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Next-generation hybrid bioanalytical platforms and clinical integration of TDM technologies for precision monitoring to optimize last-resort antibiotic therapy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Personalizing Antidepressant Therapy: Integrating Pharmacogenomics, Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, and Digital Tools for Improved Depression Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Machine Learning-Based Algorithm for Tacrolimus Dose Optimization in Hospitalized Kidney Transplant Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Protocol for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Within the Clinical Range Using Mid-infrared Spectroscopy.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Population pharmacokinetics study of tacrolimus in liver transplant recipients: a comparison between patients with or without liver cancer before surgery.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a crucial clinical practice that improves pharmacological effectiveness and prevent severe drug-related adverse events. Timely reporting and intervention of critical values during TDM are essential for patient safety. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the laboratory data to provide an overview of the incidence, distribution pattern and biochemical correlates of critical values during TDM. A total of 19,110 samples were tested for nine drug concentrations between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020. Of these, 241 critical values were identified in 165 patients. The most common critical values were vancomycin trough (63.4%), followed by tacrolimus trough (16.9%) and digoxin (15.2%). The primary sources of drug critical values were the department of general intensive care unit (ICU), cardiology, and surgery ICU. At baseline or the time of critical value, significant differences were found between the vancomycin, digoxin, and tacrolimus groups in terms of blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, N-terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-proBNP), and lymphocyte percentage, P < 0.05. Therefore, it is important to prioritize and closely monitor drug concentrations to reduce laboratory critical values during TDM.
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.