Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32858530›Full record

SynthesisCritical care medicine2020

Practices in Triage and Transfer of Critically Ill Patients: A Qualitative Systematic Review of Selection Criteria.

Joseph Dahine, Paul C Hébert, Daniela Ziegler, Noémie Chenail, Nicolay Ferrari, Réjean Hébert

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Outcome of patients with solid malignancies considered for intensive care unit admission: a single-center prospective cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
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

6 authors.

Joseph DahineDépartement de médecine spécialisée, Centre intégré de santé et services sociaux de Laval (CISSS de Laval), Hôpital Cité-de-la-Santé, Université de Montréal, Laval, QC, Canada.
Paul C HébertDépartement de médecine, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Université de Montréal et Centre de Recherche, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Daniela ZieglerBibliothèque, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Noémie ChenailUniversité de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Nicolay FerrariCentre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Réjean HébertDepartment of Health Management, Evaluation and Policy, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify and appraise articles describing criteria used to prioritize or withhold a critical care admission. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, Medline, EBM Reviews, and CINAHL Complete databases. Gray literature searches and a manual review of references were also performed. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. STUDY SELECTION: We sought all articles and abstracts of original research as well as local, provincial, or national policies on the topic of ICU resource allocation. We excluded studies whose population of interest was neonatal, pediatric, trauma, or noncritically ill. Screening of 6,633 citations was conducted. DATA EXTRACTION: Triage and/or transport criteria were extracted, based on type of article, methodology, publication year, and country. An appraisal scale was developed to assess the quality of identified articles. We also developed a robustness score to further appraise the robustness of the evidence supporting each criterion. Finally, all criteria were extracted, evaluated, and grouped by theme. DATA SYNTHESIS: One-hundred twenty-nine articles were included. These were mainly original research (34%), guidelines (26%), and reviews (21%). Among them, we identified 200 unique triage and transport criteria. Most articles highlighted an exclusion (71%) rather than a prioritization mechanism (17%). Very few articles pertained to transport of critically ill patients (4%). Criteria were classified in one of four emerging themes: patient, condition, physician, and context. The majority of criteria used were nonspecific. No study prospectively evaluated the implementation of its cited criteria.

conclusionsThis systematic review identified 200 criteria classified within four themes that may be included when devising triage programs including the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. We identified significant knowledge gaps where research would assist in improving existing triage criteria and guidelines, aiming to decrease arbitrary decisions and variability.

Indexed as

BetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Critical CareCritical IllnessEmergency Medical ServicesHumansIntensive Care UnitsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePandemicsPatient SafetyPatient TransferPneumonia, ViralSARS-CoV-2Triage

Identifiers

PMID32858530
PMCPMC7493782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.