Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34493931›Full record

ReviewCurrent anesthesiology reports2021

Delirium in Intensive Care.

Lone Musaeus Poulsen, Stine Estrup, Camilla Bekker Mortensen, Nina Christine Andersen-Ranberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current anesthesiology reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Prediction of Delirium in the Critically Ill Obstetric Patients: An Old Friend to the Rescue?Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Implementation of a Follow-Up Program for Intensive Care Unit Survivors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Observational
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

4 authors.

Lone Musaeus PoulsenDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Zealand University Hospital, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Koege, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-7030-3395
Stine EstrupDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Camilla Bekker MortensenDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Zealand University Hospital, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Koege, Denmark.
Nina Christine Andersen-RanbergDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Zealand University Hospital, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Koege, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose of Review: Delirium in the intensive care unit (ICU) has become increasingly acknowledged as a significant problem for critically ill patients affecting both the actual course of illness as well as outcomes. In this review, we focus on the current evidence and the gaps in knowledge. Recent Findings: This review highlights several areas in which the evidence is weak and further research is needed in both pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment. A better understanding of subtypes and their different response to therapy is needed and further studies in aetiology are warranted. Larger studies are needed to explore risk factors for developing delirium and for examining long-term consequences. Finally, a stronger focus on experienced delirium and considering the perspectives of both patients and their families is encouraged. Summary: With the growing number of studies and a better framework for research leading to stronger evidence, the outcomes for patients suffering from delirium will most definitely improve in the years to come.

Indexed as

CAM-ICUCore outcomeDeliriumIntensive careNon-pharmacologicalPharmacologicalRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID34493931
PMCPMC8413710

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.