Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31356472›Full record

ArticleCritical care medicine2019

Clinical Examination for the Prediction of Mortality in the Critically Ill: The Simple Intensive Care Studies-I.

Bart Hiemstra, Ruben J Eck, Renske Wiersema, Thomas Kaufmann, Geert Koster, Thomas W L Scheeren, Harold Snieder, Anders Perner, Ville Pettilä, Jørn Wetterslev and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care medicine, 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
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Early prediction of mortality upon intensive care unit admission.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Bart HiemstraDepartment of Critical Care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Ruben J EckDepartment of Critical Care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Renske WiersemaDepartment of Critical Care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Thomas KaufmannDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Geert KosterDepartment of Critical Care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Thomas W L ScheerenDepartment of Anesthesiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Harold SniederDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Anders PernerDepartment of Intensive Care, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ville PettiläDivision of Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Jørn WetterslevCentre for Research in Intensive Care, Department 7831, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Frederik KeusDepartment of Critical Care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Iwan C C van der HorstDepartment of Critical Care, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
SICS Study Group
University Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity of Groningen · NLCentre for Research in Intensive Care · DKCopenhagen University Hospital · DKUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesCaregivers use clinical examination to timely recognize deterioration of a patient, yet data on the prognostic value of clinical examination are inconsistent. In the Simple Intensive Care Studies-I, we evaluated the association of clinical examination findings with 90-day mortality in critically ill patients.

designProspective single-center cohort study.

settingICU of a single tertiary care level hospital between March 27, 2015, and July 22, 2017. PATIENTS: All consecutive adults acutely admitted to the ICU and expected to stay for at least 24 hours.

interventionsA protocolized clinical examination of 19 clinical signs conducted within 24 hours of admission. MEASUREMENTS MAIN

resultsIndependent predictors of 90-day mortality were identified using multivariable logistic regression analyses. Model performance was compared with established prognostic risk scores using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. Robustness of our findings was tested by internal bootstrap validation and adjustment of the threshold for statistical significance. A total of 1,075 patients were included, of whom 298 patients (28%) had died at 90-day follow-up. Multivariable analyses adjusted for age and norepinephrine infusion rate demonstrated that the combination of higher respiratory rate, higher systolic blood pressure, lower central temperature, altered consciousness, and decreased urine output was independently associated with 90-day mortality (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.78). Clinical examination had a similar discriminative value as compared with the Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.73-0.79; p = 0.29) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV (using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.74-0.80; p = 0.16) and was significantly better than the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.64-0.71; p < 0.001).

conclusionsClinical examination has reasonable discriminative value for assessing 90-day mortality in acutely admitted ICU patients. In our study population, a single, protocolized clinical examination had similar prognostic abilities compared with the Simplified Acute Physiology Score-II and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-IV and outperformed the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score.

Indexed as

Critical CareOrgan Dysfunction ScoresSimplified Acute Physiology ScoreAgedCritical IllnessFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID31356472
PMCPMC6750157
OpenAlexW2964459090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.