The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Critical Review of the Ability of Continuous Cardiac Output Monitors to Measure Trends in Cardiac Output
Abstract
Numerous cardiac output (CO) monitors have been produced that provide continuous rather than intermittent readings. Bland and Altman has become the standard method for validating their performance against older standards. However, the Bland and Altman method only assesses precision and does not assess how well a device detects serial changes in CO (trending ability). Currently, there is no consensus on how trending ability, or trend analysis, should be performed. Therefore, we performed a literature review to identify articles published between 1997 and 2009 that compared methods of continuous CO measurement. Identified articles were grouped according to measurement technique and statistical methodology. Articles that analyzed trending ability were reviewed with the aim of finding an acceptable statistical method. Two hundred two articles were identified. The most popular methods were pulse contour (69 articles), Doppler (54), bioimpedance (38), and transpulmonary or continuous thermodilution (27). Forty-one articles addressed trending, and of these only 23 provided an in-depth analysis. Several common statistical themes were identified: time plots, regression analysis, Bland and Altman using change in CO (ΔCO), and the 4-quadrant plot, which used direction of change of ΔCO to determine the concordance. This plot was further refined by exclusion of data when values were small. Receiver operating characteristic curves were used to define the exclusion zone. In animal studies, a reliable reference standard such as an aortic flowprobe was frequently used, and regression or time plots could be used to show trending. Clinical studies were more problematic because data collection points were fewer (8-10 per subject). The consensus was to use the 4-quadrant plot with exclusion zones and apply concordance analysis. A concordance rate of >92% when using a 15% zone indicated good trending. A new method of presenting trend data (ΔCO) on a polar plot is proposed. Agreement was shown by the angle with the horizontal axis and ΔCO by the distance from the center. Trending can be assessed by the vertical limits of the data, similar to the Bland and Altman method.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
3 retracted
Mayer, J., Boldt, J., Poland, R., Peterson, A. J., & Manecke, G. R. (2009) · Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia · doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2009.03.003 · Cited by 142
RetractedMayer, J., Boldt, J., Wolf, M. W., Lang, J. K., & Suttner, S. W. (2008) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e318161964d · Cited by 101
RetractedMayer, J., Boldt, J., Beschmann, R., Stephan, A., & Suttner, S. (2009) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1093/bja/aep133 · Cited by 24
RetractedSTATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
(1965) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(65)91037-8 · Cited by 16,856
A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.
Lin, L. I.-K. (1989) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2532051 · Cited by 8,785
Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine
Zweig, M. H., & Campbell, G. (1993) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/39.4.561 · Cited by 6,569
The Effectiveness of Right Heart Catheterization in the Initial Care of Critically III Patients
Connors, A. F. (1996) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03540110043030 · Cited by 2,210
Agreement Between Methods of Measurement with Multiple Observations Per Individual
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (2007) · Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics · doi:10.1080/10543400701329422 · Cited by 1,864
Critchley, L. A. H., & Critchley, J. A. J. H. (1999) · Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing · doi:10.1023/a:1009982611386 · Cited by 1,325
Self-citation
Cited by
Cannesson, M., Le Manach, Y., Hofer, C. K., Goarin, J. P., Lehot, J.-J., Vallet, B., & Tavernier, B. (2011) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0b013e318225b80a · Cited by 554
Morrow, D. A., Fang, J. C., Fintel, D. J., Granger, C. B., Katz, J. N., Kushner, F. G., Kuvin, J. T., Lopez-Sendon, J., McAreavey, D., Nallamothu, B., et al. (2012) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e31826890b0 · Cited by 310
Noninvasive Cardiac Output Monitors: A State-of the-Art Review
Marik, P. E. (2013) · Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia · doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2012.03.022 · Cited by 293
Noninvasive continuous cardiac output monitoring in perioperative and intensive care medicine
Saugel, B., Cecconi, M., Wagner, J. Y., & Reuter, D. A. (2015) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1093/bja/aeu447 · Cited by 268
Current use of the pulmonary artery catheter in cardiac surgery: a survey study
Judge, O., Ji, F., Fleming, N., & Liu, H. (2015) · Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia · doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2014.07.016 · Cited by 93
Metadata
- Authors
- Critchley, L. A., Lee, A., & Ho, A. M.-H.
- Venue
- Anesthesia & Analgesia
- Published
- 2010-11
- Volume
- 111
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1180-1192
- ISSN
- 0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2069216248
- Cited by
- 512
- References
- 55
- FWCI
- 36.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Critical Review of the Ability of Continuous Cardiac Output Monitors to Measure Trends in Cardiac Output. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1213/ane.0b013e3181f08a5b
- The paper
- Critchley, L. A., Lee, A., & Ho, A. M.-H. (2010). A Critical Review of the Ability of Continuous Cardiac Output Monitors to Measure Trends in Cardiac Output. Anesthesia & Analgesia. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0b013e3181f08a5b
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.
