ReviewCureus2024
Evaluation of Parenteral Vitamin C's Effectiveness in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vitamin C, a key nutrient with potent antioxidant and immunomodulatory properties, has been explored for its therapeutic potential in treating severe infections, particularly sepsis. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of parenteral vitamin C in improving clinical outcomes in patients with severe infections. A comprehensive search of several databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, was conducted for studies published between January 2000 and June 2024. Included were randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and case reports that examined the use of parenteral vitamin C in adult patients with severe infections. Data extracted included study design, sample size, intervention specifics, and clinical outcomes. Quality was assessed using tools appropriate to each study design, such as the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The review included nine studies with diverse methodologies. While individual studies reported benefits such as improved immune function and reduced oxidative stress, larger systematic reviews and meta-analyses did not demonstrate a significant reduction in mortality. The results indicate that while parenteral vitamin C may improve certain biochemical and physiological parameters, these improvements do not consistently translate into enhanced survival or substantial clinical benefits. Parenteral vitamin C shows potential in modulating immune response and reducing oxidative damage in severe infections. However, its impact on key clinical outcomes like mortality and long-term recovery remains uncertain. This review highlights the need for further high-quality, randomized controlled trials to clarify vitamin C's role in managing severe infections and define optimal therapeutic protocols.
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.