ArticleIntensive care medicine2023
Giving a voice to patients at high risk of dying in the intensive care unit: a multiple source approach.
Article in Intensive care medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- [Treatment and support for adults at the end of life in intensive care. A recommendation by the Ethics Section of DIVI and the German Society for Palliative Medicine. : Part 2: Therapeutic measures and support at the end of life in intensive care].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025Guideline
- Making Sense of the Final Moments: A Qualitative Study of Informal Caregivers' Perception of Good Death in the Bereavement Process.Scandinavian journal of caring sciences · 2026Article
- Foundational principles for young intensivists to drive better outcomes: palliative care.Critical care science · 2026Article
- Review
- Family concerns in organ donor conversations: a qualitative embedded multiple-case study.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeData are scarce regarding the experience of critically ill patients at high risk of death. Identifying their concerns could allow clinicians to better meet their needs and align their end-of-life trajectory with their preferences and values. We aimed to identify concerns expressed by conscious patients at high risk of dying in the intensive care unit (ICU).
methodsMultiple source multicentre study. Concerns expressed by patients were collected from five different sources (literature review, panel of 50 ICU experts, prospective study in 11 ICUs, in-depth interviews with 17 families and 15 patients). All qualitative data collected were analyzed using thematic content analysis.
resultsThe five sources produced 1307 concerns that were divided into 7 domains and 41 sub-domains. After removing redundant items and duplicates, and combining and reformulating similar items, 28 concerns were extracted from the analysis of the data. To increase accuracy, they were merged and consolidated, and resulted in a final list of 15 concerns pertaining to seven domains: concerns about loved-ones; symptom management and care (including team competence, goals of care discussions); spiritual, religious, and existential preoccupations (including regrets, meaning, hope and trust); being oneself (including fear of isolation and of being a burden, absence of hope, and personhood); the need for comforting experiences and pleasure; dying and death (covering emotional and practical concerns); and after death preoccupations.
conclusionThis list of 15 concerns may prove valuable for clinicians as a tool for improving communication and support to better meet the needs of patients at high risk of dying.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37354232What 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.