Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30063492›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in critical care2018

Understanding patient-important outcomes after critical illness: a synthesis of recent qualitative, empirical, and consensus-related studies.

Victor D Dinglas, Leeza N Faraone, Dale M Needham

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readConsensus StatementReview
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. It is linked to trial NCT05149430 (Evolution and Follow-up of the Quality of Life and Functional Capacity, in Patients Admitted in Ward Room, Post-hospitality in the Intensive Care Unit. Descriptive Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 64 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT05149430 completednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Evolution and Follow-up of the Quality of Life and Functional Capacity, in Patients Admitted in Ward Room, Post-hospitality in the Intensive Care Unit. Descriptive Study

TypeobservationalSponsorSanatorio Anchorena San MartinRan2019 to 2020Enrolled101ConditionsPost-intensive Care SyndromeArmsObservational Quality of life and functional capacity
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

64 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 113 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

4 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Victor D DinglasOutcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group.
Leeza N FaraoneOutcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group.
Dale M NeedhamOutcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery (OACIS) Group.
Johns Hopkins Medicine · USJohns Hopkins University · USPulmonary and Critical Care Associates · US

Funding

Improving Long-Term Outcomes Clinical Research for Acute Respiratory FailureR24HL111895 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI NEEDHAM, DALE MURRAY · 2013 to 2017
$5.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS R24 HL111895
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewPatients surviving critical illness frequently experience long-lasting morbidities. Consequently, researchers and clinicians are increasingly focused on evaluating and improving survivors' outcomes after hospital discharge. This review synthesizes recent research aimed at understanding the postdischarge outcomes that patients consider important (i.e., patient-important outcomes) for the purpose of advancing future clinical research in the field. RECENT

findingsAcross multiple types of studies, patients, family members, researchers, and clinicians have consistently endorsed physical function, cognition, and mental health as important outcomes to evaluate in future research. Aspects of social health, such as return to work and changes in interpersonal relationships, also were noted in some research publications. Informed by these recent studies, an international Delphi consensus process (including patient and caregiver representatives) recommended the following core set of outcomes for use in all studies evaluating acute respiratory failure survivors after hospital discharge: survival, physical function (including muscle/nerve function and pulmonary function), cognition, mental health, health-related quality of life, and pain. The Delphi panel also reached consensus on recommended measurement instruments for some of these core outcomes. SUMMARY: Recent studies have made major advances in understanding patient-important outcomes to help guide future clinical research aimed at improving ICU survivors' recovery.

Indexed as

Continuity of Patient CareCritical IllnessSurvivorsDelphi TechniqueHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareQualitative ResearchQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID30063492
PMCPMC6133198
OpenAlexW2917276665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.