Cited by 4Hemodynamic Monitoring and TherapySepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring

The Gold Standard of Pediatric Hemodynamic Monitoring: Not All That Glitters Is Gold

Ricci, Zaccaria, Iacobelli, Roberta, Romagnoli, Stefano·2023·Anesthesia & Analgesia

Abstract

hemodynamic monitoring in children is difficult and it lacks a gold standard

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1213/ane.0000000000006215

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ricci, Z., Iacobelli, R., & Romagnoli, S.
Affiliations
  • Meyer Children's Hospital (IT)
  • Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi (IT)
Venue
Anesthesia & Analgesia
Published
2023-05-19
Volume
136
Issue
6
Pages
e26-e27
ISSN
0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4377088368
Cited by
4
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Anesthesia & Analgesia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Florence Research (University of Florence) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Healthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Keywords
hemodynamic monitoring, children, gold standard, pediatric anesthesia
MeSH terms
Hemodynamic Monitoring, Child, Humans, Pediatrics

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