Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24186910›Full record

ArticleNeurology2013

Continuous and routine EEG in intensive care: utilization and outcomes, United States 2005-2009.

John P Ney, David N van der Goes, Marc R Nuwer, Lonnie Nelson, Matthew A Eccher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

61 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Using artificial intelligence to optimize anti-seizure treatment and EEG-guided decisions in severe brain injury.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Continuous electroencephalography in the intensive care unit: A critical review and position statement from an Australian and New Zealand perspective.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

John P NeyFrom the Departments of Neurology (J.P.N.) and Health Services (L.N.), University of Washington, Seattle; Department of Economics & Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (D.N.v.d.G), University of New Mexico, Albuquerque; Reed Neurological Research Center (M.R.N.), University of California, Los Angeles; and Department of Neurology (M.A.E.), Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH.
David N van der Goes
Marc R Nuwer
Lonnie Nelson
Matthew A Eccher

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the effect of intensive care unit continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring on inpatient mortality, hospital charges, and length of stay.

methodsA retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, a dataset representing 20% of inpatient discharges in nonfederal US hospitals. Adult discharge records reporting mechanical ventilation and EEG (routine EEG or cEEG) were included. cEEG was compared with routine EEG alone in association with the primary outcome of in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes of total hospital charges and length of stay. Demographics, hospital characteristics, and medical comorbidity were used for multivariate adjustments of the primary and secondary outcomes.

resultsA total of 40,945 patient discharges in the weighted sample met inclusion criteria, of which 5,949 had reported cEEG. Mechanically ventilated patients receiving cEEG were younger than routine EEG patients (56 vs 61 years; p < 0.001). There was no difference in the 2 groups in income or medical comorbidities. cEEG was significantly associated with lower in-hospital mortality in both univariate (odds ratio = 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.64; p < 0.001) and multivariate (odds ratio = 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.51-0.76; p < 0.001) analyses. There was no significant difference in costs or length of stay for patients who received cEEG relative to those receiving only routine EEG. Sensitivity analysis showed that adjusting for diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) for any neurologic diagnoses, DRGs for neurologic procedures, and specific DRGs for epilepsy/convulsions did not substantially alter the association of cEEG with reduced inpatient mortality.

conclusionscEEG is favorably associated with inpatient survival in mechanically ventilated patients, without adding significant charges to the hospital stay.

Indexed as

Critical CareCross-Sectional StudiesElectroencephalographyFemaleHospital MortalityHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateUnited States

Identifiers

PMID24186910
PMCPMC3854828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.