ArticleCritical care medicine2019
Clinical Examination for the Prediction of Mortality in the Critically Ill: The Simple Intensive Care Studies-I.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of capillary refill time In adult critically ill patients: a narrative review on potentials, pitfalls, and perspectives.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Review
- Augmenting Mortality Prediction in Critically Ill Adults With Medication Data and Machine Learning Models.Critical care explorations · 2025Article
- Early prediction of mortality upon intensive care unit admission.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- Deep embedded clustering generalisability and adaptation for integrating mixed datatypes: two critical care cohorts.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Reevaluating vitamin C in sepsis and septic shock: a potential benefit in severe cases?Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- How to integrate hemodynamic variables during resuscitation of septic shock?Journal of intensive medicine · 2023Review
- The simple observational critical care studies: estimations by students, nurses, and physicians of in-hospital and 6-month mortality.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Observational
- Article
- Burden of acute kidney injury and 90-day mortality in critically ill patients.BMC nephrology · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.