Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36874291›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Intensive Care Society2023

Benefits and options for voice restoration in mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients with a tracheostomy.

Sarah Wallace, Sue McGowan, Anna-Liisa Sutt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 2023. 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. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Early versus late tracheostomy: what do patients want?Critical care (London, England) · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Sarah WallaceDepartment of Speech Voice and Swallowing, Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1593-7827
Sue McGowanTherapy Services, National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, UK.
Anna-Liisa SuttCritical Care Research Group, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Communication difficulties and their effects on patients who are mechanically ventilated are commonly reported and well described. The possibility of restoring speech for patients has obvious benefits, not only for meeting patient's immediate needs, but for helping them to re-engage in relationships and participate meaningfully in their recovery and rehabilitation. This opinion piece by a group of United Kingdom (UK) based Speech and Language Therapy experts working in critical care describes the various ways by which a patient's own voice can be restored. Common barriers to using different techniques and potential solutions are explored. We therefore hope that this will encourage intensive care unit (ICU) multi-disciplinary teams to advocate and facilitate early verbal communication in these patients.

Identifiers

PMID36874291
PMCPMC9975806

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.