Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30621770›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2019

Health solutions to improve post-intensive care outcomes: a realist review protocol.

A Fuchsia Howard, Leanne Currie, Vicky Bungay, Margaret Meloche, Robert McDermid, Sarah Crowe, Andrea Ryce, William Harding, Gregory Haljan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021
    Review
  8. Optimizing care for critically ill older adults.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021
    Review
  9. 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

9 authors.

A Fuchsia HowardFaculty of Applied Sciences, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, T201-2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 2B5, Canada. fuchsia.howard@ubc.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-5704-1733
Leanne CurrieFaculty of Applied Sciences, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, T201-2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 2B5, Canada.
Vicky BungayFaculty of Applied Sciences, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, T201-2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 2B5, Canada.
Margaret MelocheFraser Health Authority, Surrey, British Columbia, Canada.
Robert McDermidFraser Health Authority, Surrey, British Columbia, Canada.
Sarah CroweFraser Health Authority, Surrey, British Columbia, Canada.
Andrea RyceProvincial Health Services Authority, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
William HardingFaculty of Applied Sciences, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, T201-2211 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T 2B5, Canada.
Gregory HaljanFraser Health Authority, Surrey, British Columbia, Canada.

Funding

CIHR 153219
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile 80% of critically ill patients treated in an intensive care unit (ICU) will survive, survivors often suffer a constellation of new or worsening physical, cognitive, and psychiatric complications, termed post-intensive care syndrome. Emerging evidence paints a challenging picture of complex, long-term complications that are often untreated and culminate in substantial dependence on acute care services. Clinicians and decision-makers in the Fraser Health Authority of British Columbia are working to develop evidence-based community healthcare solutions that will be successful in the context of existing healthcare services. The objective of the proposed review is to provide the theoretical scaffolding to transform the care of survivors of critical illness by a synthesis of relevant clinical and healthcare service programs.

methodsRealist review will be used to develop and refine a theoretical understanding of why, how, for whom, and in what circumstances post-ICU program impact ICU survivors' outcomes. This review will follow the recommended five steps of realist review which include (1) clarifying the scope of the review and articulating a preliminary program theory, (2) searching for evidence, (3) appraising primary studies and extracting data, (4) synthesizing evidence and sharing conclusions, and (5) disseminating and implementing recommendations. DISCUSSION: This realist review will provide a program theory, encompassing the contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes, to explain how clinical and health service interventions to improve ICU survivor outcomes operate in different contexts for different survivors, and with what effect. This review will be an evidentiary pillar for health service development and implementation by our knowledge user team members as well as advance scholarly knowledge relevant nationally and internationally. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018087795.

Indexed as

AftercareChronic DiseaseCritical IllnessBritish ColumbiaCommunity Health ServicesCritical CareEarly DiagnosisEarly Medical InterventionHealth PolicyHumansIntensive Care UnitsReview Literature as TopicRisk AssessmentCritical careHealth services researchIntensive careLiterature reviewPost-intensive care syndromeRealist reviewRehabilitation medicine

Identifiers

PMID30621770
PMCPMC6323758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.