Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36301954›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2022

Consent is a confounding factor in a prospective observational study of critically ill elderly patients.

Hans Flaatten, Bertrand Guidet, Christian Jung, Ariane Boumendil, Susannah Leaver, Wojciech Szczeklik, Antonio Artigas, Finn Andersen, Rui Moreno, Sten Walther and 8 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Acute Care Research Requires an Adapted Consent Procedure to Safeguard Participants' Autonomy and Rights While Limiting the Risk of Consent-Bias.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

18 authors.

Hans FlaattenDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-9186-3482
Bertrand GuidetSorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Service de Animation, F75012, Paris, France.
Christian JungDivision of Cardiology, Pulmonology and Vascular Medicine, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Ariane BoumendilAP-HP, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, service de réanimation, F75012, Paris, France.
Susannah LeaverResearch Lead Critical Care Directorate St George's Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Wojciech SzczeklikIntensive Care and Perioperative Medicine Division, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland.
Antonio ArtigasIntensive care Department, CIBER Enfermedades Respiratorias, Corporacion Sanitaria Universitaria Parc Tauli, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Sabadell, Spain.
Finn AndersenDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, NTNU, Dep of Circulation and Medical Imaging, Ålesund Hospital, Trondheim, Ålesund, Norway.
Rui MorenoFaculdade de Ciências Médicas de Lisboa (Nova Médical School), Unidade de Cuidados Intensivos Neurocríticos e Trauma, Hospital de São José, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-9795-8316
Sten WaltherLinkoping University Hospital, Linkoping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-3862-2556
Sandra OeyenDepartment of Intensive Care 1K12IC Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Joerg C SchefoldDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Inselspital, Universitätsspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-9162-5724
Brian MarshMater Misericordiae University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Michael JoannidisDivision of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Muhammed ElhadiFaculty of Medicine, University of Tripili, Tripoli, Libya.ORCID 0000-0001-6406-4212
Yuriy NalapkoEuropean Wellness International, ICU, Luhansk, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0001-7431-4545
Jesper FjølnerDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Viborg Regional Hospital, Viborg, Denmark.
Dylan W de LangeDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center, University Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During analysis of a prospective multinational observation study of critically ill patients ≥80 years of age, the VIP2 study, we also studied the effects of differences in country consent for study inclusion. This is a post hoc analysis where the ICUs were analyzed according to requirement for study consent. Group A: ICUs in countries with no requirement for consent at admission but with deferred consent in survivors. Group B: ICUs where some form of active consent at admission was necessary either from the patient or surrogates. Patients' characteristics, the severity of disease and outcome variables were compared. Totally 3098 patients were included from 21 countries. The median age was 84 years (IQR 81-87). England was not included because of changing criteria for consent during the study period. Group A (7 countries, 1200 patients), and group B (15 countries, 1898 patients) were comparable with age and gender distribution. Cognition was better preserved prior to admission in group B. Group A suffered from more organ dysfunction at admission compared to group B with Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score median 8 and 6 respectively. ICU survival was lower in group A, 66.2% compared to 78.4% in group B (p<0.001). We hence found profound effects on outcomes according to differences in obtaining consent for this study. It seems that the most severely ill elderly patients were less often recruited to the study in group B. Hence the outcome measured as survival was higher in this group. We therefore conclude that consent likely is an important confounding factor for outcome evaluation in international studies focusing on old patients.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessOrgan Dysfunction ScoresAgedAged, 80 and overHumansIntensive Care UnitsOutcome Assessment, Health CareProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36301954
PMCPMC9612504

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.