ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2021
[Quality indicators in intensive care medicine : Background and practical use].
Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Core curriculum of intensive care and emergency medicine in internal medicine].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025Review
- Barriers and Facilitators of the Use of Computerized Critical Care Information Systems in the Intensive Care Unit: Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Observational
- Sedation, sleep-promotion, and non-verbal and verbal communication techniques in critically ill intubated or tracheostomized patients: results of a survey.BMC anesthesiology · 2022Article
- Observational
- [Core curriculum Medical intensive care medicine of the German Society of Medical Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine (DGIIN)].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2021Review
- The future development of intensive care quality indicators - a methods paper.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quality indicators are used in medicine to indirectly reflect quality via key figures. Intensive care medicine, in particular, contains a large number of standard processes for which quality monitoring is a suitable solution. The indicators used in quality assurance have advantages and disadvantages. The evaluation of fundamental aspects of the use of indicators in intensive care medicine can be illustrated by means of different types of indicators. A comparison of different indicators-the intensive care quality indicators of the DIVI (Deutsche Interdisziplinäre Vereinigung für Intensiv- und Notfallmedizin [German interdisciplinary association for intensive care and emergency medicine]) and a selection of international indicators-shows possible benefits of indicators, but also their limits in applicability and meaningfulness. The comparison also takes into account the possible applicability for individual institutions. There is no gold standard for the development of quality indicators. Nevertheless, methodological progress has been made in this area in recent years. Since the use of indicators has so far been unable to demonstrate any scientifically verifiable benefit for patient outcome, this aspect will have to come into the focus regarding development and application in the future. In addition, topics for the development of key figures are mentioned, which above all must be oriented more strongly towards the long-term well-being of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31822943What 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.