ArticleResearch square2023
Common Data Elements for Disorders of Consciousness: Recommendations from the Working Group on Goals-of-care and Family/Surrogate Decision-Maker Data.
Article in Research square, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Common Data Elements for Disorders of Consciousness: Recommendations from the Working Group in the Pediatric Population.Neurocritical care · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn order to facilitate comparative research, it is essential for the fields of neurocritical care and rehabilitation to establish common data elements (CDE) for disorders of consciousness (DoC). Our objective was to identify CDEs related to goals-of-care decisions and family/surrogate decision-making for patients with DoC.
methodsTo achieve this, we formed nine CDE working groups as part of the Neurocritical Care Society's Curing Coma Campaign. Our working group focused on goals-of-care decisions and family/surrogate decision-makers created five subgroups: (1) clinical variables of surrogates, (2) psychological distress of surrogates, (3) decision-making quality, (4) quality of communication, and (5) quality of end-of-life care. Each subgroup searched for existing relevant CDEs in the NIH/CDE catalog and conducted an extensive literature search for additional relevant study instruments to be recommended. We classified each CDE according to the standard definitions of "core," "basic," "exploratory," or "supplemental," as well as their utility for studying the acute or chronic phase of DoC, or both.
resultsWe identified 32 relevant pre-existing NIH CDEs across all subgroups. A total of 34 new instruments were added across all subgroups. Only one CDE was recommended as disease core, the "mode of death" of the patient from the clinical variables subgroup.
conclusionsOur findings provide valuable CDEs specific to goals-of-care decisions and family/surrogate decision-making for patients with DoC that can be used to standardize studies to generate high-quality and reproducible research in this area.
Identifiers
What 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.