Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 281

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin as a prognostic marker in sepsis: an observational study

Open access
Christ-Crain, Mirjam, Morgenthaler, Nils G, Struck, Joachim, Harbarth, Stephan, Bergmann, Andreas, Müller, Beat·2005·Critical Care
DOI 10.1186/cc3885
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Introduction: Measurement of biomarkers is a potential approach to early assessment and prediction of mortality in patients with sepsis. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic value of mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MR-proADM) levels in a cohort of medical intensive care patients and to compare it with other biomarkers and physiological scores. Method: We evaluated blood samples from 101 consecutive critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit and from 160 age-matched healthy control individuals. The patients had initially been enrolled in a prospective observational study investigating the prognostic value of endocrine dysfunction in critically ill patients ("PEDCRIP" Study). The prognostic value of MR-proADM levels was compared with those of two physiological scores and of various biomarkers (for example C-reactive Protein, IL-6, procalcitonin). MR-proADM was measured in EDTA plasma from all patients using a new sandwich immunoassay. Results: On admission, 53 patients had sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock, and 48 had systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Median MR-proADM levels on admission (nmol/l [range]) were 1.1 (0.3–3.7) in patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome, 1.8 (0.4–5.8) in those with sepsis, 2.3 (1.0–17.6) in those with severe sepsis and 4.5 (0.9–21) in patients with septic shock. In healthy control individuals the median MR-proADM was 0.4 (0.21–0.97). On admission, circulating MR-proADM levels in patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock were significantly higher in nonsurvivors (8.5 [0.8–21.0]; P < 0.001) than in survivors (1.7 [0.4–17.6]). In a receiver operating curve analysis of survival of patients with sepsis, the area under the curve (AUC) for MR-proADM was 0.81, which was similar to the AUCs for IL-6, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II. The prognostic value of MR-proADM was independent of the sepsis classification system used. Conclusion: MR-proADM may be helpful in individual risk assessment in septic patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/cc3885

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 281

Metadata

Authors
Christ-Crain, M., Morgenthaler, N. G., Struck, J., Harbarth, S., Bergmann, A., & Müller, B.
Venue
Critical Care
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2005-11-15
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
R816-24
ISSN
1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/cc3885
OpenAlex
W1531152036
Cited by
281
References
41
FWCI
6.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.