ArticleCritical care (London, England)2023
The use of checklists in the intensive care unit: a scoping review.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of Rounding Checklists on the Outcomes of Patients Admitted to ICUs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care explorations · 2024Pooled it
- Operational Ethics in the Cardiovascular Intensive Care Unit: A Practical Framework for Ethical Decision-Making.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Development of infection control and preventive nursing assessment tool for central line-associated bloodstream infection in selected hospitals in China: an exploratory sequential mixed-method study.Infection prevention in practice · 2026Article
- Staff-Reported Peri-Procedural Workflow Vulnerabilities and a Preliminary Checklist Prototype for Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Patients Undergoing Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy: A Single-Centre Pilot Survey.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Making Comfort Visible or Making Patients Comfortable? Rethinking Structured Humanisation in Intensive Care.Nursing in critical care · 2026Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to ICU Liberation Bundle Implementation and Compliance.Critical care explorations · 2026Article
- Practice guideline on the prevention and treatment of central line-associated bloodstream infection: Part 2 - Treatment.Journal of intensive medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of an assessment form on promoting in-hospital initiation of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in hospitalized patients with heart failure.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Article
- Digital Health Technologies and Standardized Protocols for Patient Safety in Hospital-Based Settings: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Golden hour(s) quality improvement protocols and their effect on outcomes in preterm infants ≤ 32 weeks of gestation: a scoping review.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Non-pharmacological post-intensive care interventions to improve patient outcome following critical illness: a scoping review.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Clinical governance in intensive care medicine.Intensive care medicine · 2024Article
- Article
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
backgroundDespite the extensive volume of research published on checklists in the intensive care unit (ICU), no review has been published on the broader role of checklists within the intensive care unit, their implementation and validation, and the recommended clinical context for their use. Accordingly, a scoping review was necessary to map the current literature and to guide future research on intensive care checklists. This review focuses on what checklists are currently used, how they are used, process of checklist development and implementation, and outcomes associated with checklist use.
methodsA systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases was conducted, followed by a grey literature search. The abstracts of the identified studies were screened. Full texts of relevant articles were reviewed, and the references of included studies were subsequently screened for additional relevant articles. Details of the study characteristics, study design, checklist intervention, and outcomes were extracted.
resultsOur search yielded 2046 studies, of which 167 were selected for further analysis. Checklists identified in these studies were categorised into the following types: rounding checklists; delirium screening checklists; transfer and handover checklists; central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) prevention checklists; airway management checklists; and other. Of 72 significant clinical outcomes reported, 65 were positive, five were negative, and two were mixed. Of 122 significant process of care outcomes reported, 114 were positive and eight were negative.
conclusionsChecklists are commonly used in the intensive care unit and appear in many clinical guidelines. Delirium screening checklists and rounding checklists are well implemented and validated in the literature. Clinical and process of care outcomes associated with checklist use are predominantly positive. Future research on checklists in the intensive care unit should focus on establishing clinical guidelines for checklist types and processes for ongoing modification and improvements using post-intervention data.
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.