ArticleRevista Brasileira de terapia intensiva
What outcomes should be evaluated in critically ill patients?
Article in Revista Brasileira de terapia intensiva. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Energy and Protein Delivery to Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Nutrients · 2022Pooled it
- Medication Appropriateness and Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Critical Care Patients: A Scoping Review.Drugs & aging · 2026Review
- Sample size assumptions, timing asymmetries, and endpoint selection limit the interpretability of the CLEANSE hemoadsorption trial in septic shock.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Beyond Ratios: Rethinking Clinician Workload and Intensive Care Unit Outcomes.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
- In-Hospital Mortality Prediction among Intensive Care Unit Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Machine Learning Approach.Health data science · 2025Article
- Transition experiences of patients and families upon discharge from intensive care: a scoping review.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Outcome Prediction in Critically-Ill Patients with Venous Thromboembolism and/or Cancer Using Machine Learning Algorithms: External Validation and Comparison with Scoring Systems.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Randomized clinical trials in intensive care prioritize disease-focused outcomes rather than patient-centered outcomes. A paradigm shift considering the evaluation of measures after hospital discharge and measures focused on quality of life and common symptoms, such as pain and dyspnea, could better reflect the wishes of patients and their families. However, barriers related to the systematization of the interpretation of these outcomes, the heterogeneity of measurement instruments and the greater difficulty in performing the studies, to date, seem to hinder this change. In addition, the joint participation of patients, families, researchers, and clinicians in the definition of study outcomes is not yet a reality.
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.