Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30045089›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in critical care2018

Outcomes of critical illness: what is meaningful?

Ognjen Gajic, Sumera R Ahmad, Michael E Wilson, David A Kaufman

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in critical care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Patient-centred outcomes.BJA education · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Health concerns of intensive care survivors and research participation willingness: A multicentre survey.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ognjen GajicDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine.
Sumera R AhmadDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine.
Michael E WilsonDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine.
David A KaufmanDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Pulmonary and Critical Care Associates · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USNew York University · US

Funding

Acute Care Learning Laboratory - Reducing Threats to Diagnostic Fidelity in Critical IllnessR18HS026609 · AHRQ · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI PICKERING, BRIAN W · 2018 to 2021
$2.4M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS026609
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewIn this review, we will discuss efforts and challenges in understanding and developing meaningful outcomes of critical care research, quality improvement and policy, which are patient-centered and goal concordant, rather than mortality alone. We shall discuss different aspects of what could constitute outcomes of critical illness as meaningful to the patients and other stakeholders, including families and providers. RECENT

findingsDifferent outcome pathways after critical illness impact the patients, families and providers in multiple ways. For patients who die, it is important to consider the experience of dying. For the increasing number of survivors of critical illness, challenges of survival have surfaced. The physical, mental and social debility that survivors experience has evolved into the entity called post-ICU syndrome. The importance of prehospital health state trajectory and the need for the outcome of critical care to be aligned with the patients' goals and preferences have been increasingly recognized. SUMMARY: A theoretical framework is outlined to help understand the impact of critical care interventions on outcomes that are meaningful to patients, families and healthcare providers.

Indexed as

Critical CareContinuity of Patient CareCritical IllnessHumansIntensive Care UnitsModels, TheoreticalPatient Care ManagementPatient-Centered CareQualitative ResearchQuality ImprovementSurvivors

Identifiers

PMID30045089
PMCPMC7008960
OpenAlexW2884971042

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.