ArticleBMJ open2023
Construction of reference criteria to admit patients to intermediate care units in France: a Delphi survey of intensivists, anaesthesiologists and emergency medicine practitioners (first part of the UNISURC project).
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02590172 (Evaluation of the Methods and Effectiveness of Care for Eligible Medical and Surgical Patients on Admission in Continuous Monitoring Units), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
Evaluation of the Methods and Effectiveness of Care for Eligible Medical and Surgical Patients on Admission in Continuous Monitoring Units
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patterns of medical intermediate care unit use in critically ill very old patients in France.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Outcomes of patients with hypertensive emergency managed in intensive vs intermediate care settings: a multihospital retrospective cohort study.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2026Observational
- Intensive care patients eligible for intermediate care unit-level care: a single-centre prospective cohort study in Belgium.Critical care science · 2026Article
- Characterizing ICU-like profiles of very old patients hospitalized in medical intermediate care units in France: A clustering analysis of a nationwide population-based study.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Intermediate Care Units in Europe and Italy: A Review of Structure, Outcomes, and Policy Implications for Internal Medicine.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Reliability and validity of a new postoperative track assessment tool (PoTra-tool) as a decision-making aid: A prospective observational study.European journal of anaesthesiology and intensive care · 2025Article
- In-hospital mortality of patients admitted to the intermediate care unit in hospitals with and without an intensive care unit: a nationwide inpatient database study.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- The Role of Intermediate Care in Supporting Critically Ill Patients and Critical Care Infrastructure.Critical care clinics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesNo consensus criteria describe the medical eligibility of the patients to intermediate care units (IMCUs). In this first part of the UNISURC project, we aimed to develop criteria based on a consensus of physicians from the main specialties involved in IMCU admission decisions.
designWe selected criteria from IMCU literature, scoring systems and intensive care unit nursing workload. We submitted these criteria to a panel of experts in a Delphi survey. We used a two-round Delphi survey procedure to assess the validity and feasibility of each criterion.
settingMedical practitioners in either public or private French institutions and proposed by the national scientific societies of anaesthesiology, emergency medicine and intensive care. The Delphi rounds took place in 2015-2016. OUTCOME MEASURES: Validity and feasibility of the proposed criteria; uniformity of the judgement across the primary specialty and the hospital category of the responders.
resultsThe criteria submitted to vote were classified as one of: chronic factor (CF); acute factor (AF); specific pathway (SP); nursing activity (NA) and hospital environment (HE). Of 189 experts invited, 81 (41%) responded to the first round and 62 of them (76%) responded to the second round. A definite selection of 63 items was made, distributed across 6 CF, 18 AF, 31 SP, 3 NA and 5 HE. Validity and feasibility were influenced by the specialty or the public/private status of the institution of the responders for a few items.
conclusionWe created a set of 63 consensus criteria with acceptable validity and feasibility to assess the medical eligibility of the patients to IMCUs. The second part of the UNISURC project will assess the distribution of each criterion in a prospective multicentre national cohort. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02590172.
Indexed as
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.