ReviewCritical care (London, England)2026
The molecular ICU: a primer on omics, informatics and the future of precision critical care.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- What place for pragmatic RCTs in intensive care?Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
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
Critical care has produced hundreds of neutral randomized trials, in part because therapies have been tested in biologically incoherent populations that dilute meaningful treatment effects. Syndromic diagnoses such as sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and traumatic brain injury group distinct pathobiological states under a single label, limiting the ability to detect treatment-responsive subgroups. While high-dimensional omics technologies have revealed this biologic heterogeneity, the field lacks a practical framework to translate these insights into clinical trial design and bedside decision-making. This Review addresses the translational gap in precision critical care through a pathway-level framework. We synthesize advances in genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, highlighting their roles in capturing susceptibility, host response, effector function, and real-time physiology. We propose pathway-focused biomarkers as clinically translatable signatures that preserve biological mechanisms while enabling practical measurement. We outline how pathway enrichment, network analysis, and multi-omic integration can identify these programs, and how feature selection can derive parsimonious biomarker panels for clinical use. This approach also supports pathway-guided drug repurposing by linking dysregulated molecular programs to existing therapies. Together, these signatures provide a framework for predictive enrichment, aligning patient selection with therapeutic mechanisms and facilitating implementation within adaptive platform trials. This Review serves as a practical primer that outlines the concepts and methods needed to translate omics into clinically actionable tools. By shifting from syndromic classification to pathway-defined biology, it provides a framework for biomarker development, trial design, and precision critical care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.