Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35344543›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Long-term outcomes of hospital survivors following an ICU stay: A multi-centre retrospective cohort study.

Zakary Doherty, Rebecca Kippen, David Bevan, Graeme Duke, Sharon Williams, Andrew Wilson, David Pilcher

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Psychometric properties of health-related quality of life instruments used in survivors of critical illness: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Trajectories of sepsis survivors in Australia: A scoping review.Journal of the Intensive Care Society · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Zakary DohertySchool of Rural Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6433-5123
Rebecca KippenSchool of Rural Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
David BevanDepartment of Health and Human Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Graeme DukeEastern Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Sharon WilliamsDepartment of Health and Human Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Andrew WilsonSafer Care Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
David PilcherAlfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Health and Human Services · AUAlfred Health · AUAustralian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society · AUEastern Health · AUMonash University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe focus of much Intensive Care research has been on short-term survival, which has demonstrated clear improvements over time. Less work has investigated long-term survival, and its correlates. This study describes long-term survival and identifies factors associated with time to death, in patients who initially survived an Intensive Care admission in Victoria, Australia.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients discharged alive from hospital following admission to all Intensive Care Units (ICUs) in the state of Victoria, Australia between July 2007 and June 2018. Using the Victorian Death Registry, we determined survival of patients beyond hospital discharge. Comparisons between age matched cohorts of the general population were made. Cox regression was employed to investigate factors associated with long-term survival.

resultsA total of 130,775 patients from 23 ICUs were included (median follow-up 3.6 years post-discharge). At 1-year post-discharge, survival was 90% compared to the age-matched cohort of 98%. All sub-groups had worse long-term survival than their age-matched general population cohort, apart from elderly patients admitted following cardiac surgery who had better or equal survival. Multiple demographic, socio-economic, diagnostic, acute and chronic illness factors were associated with long-term survival.

conclusionsAustralian patients admitted to ICU who survive to discharge have worse long-term survival than the general population, except for the elderly admitted to ICU following cardiac surgery. These findings may assist during goal-of-care discussions with patients during an ICU admission.

Indexed as

AftercarePatient DischargeAdultAgedHospital MortalityHospitalsHumansIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayRetrospective StudiesSurvivorsVictoria

Identifiers

PMID35344543
PMCPMC8959167
OpenAlexW4220954756

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.