Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38415714›Full record

ReviewPediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies2023

Continuity Strategies for Long-Stay PICU Patients: Consensus Statements From the Lucile Packard Foundation PICU Continuity Panel.

Jeffrey D Edwards, Lucia D Wocial, Vanessa N Madrigal, Michelle M Moon, Cheryl Ramey-Hunt, Jennifer K Walter, Jennifer D Baird, Brian D Leland

Abstract readReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Children With Severe Neurologic Impairment and Their Families in the PICU: A Secondary Qualitative Analysis to Assess Clinician-Family Collaboration and Mutuality.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2025
    Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Jeffrey D EdwardsSection of Critical Care, Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physician and Surgeons, New York, NY.
Lucia D WocialJohn J. Lynch, MD Center for Ethics, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
Vanessa N MadrigalDivision of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC.
Michelle M MoonPalliative Care and Symptom Management, Swedish Health Systems, Issaquah, Washington, DC.
Cheryl Ramey-HuntIntegrated Care Management, Case Management, and Social Work, Indiana University Health and Riley Hospital for Children, Indianapolis, IN.
Jennifer K WalterDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
Jennifer D BairdInstitute for Nursing and Interprofessional Research, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA.
Brian D LelandCharles Warren Fairbanks Center for Medical Ethics, Indianapolis, IN.

Funding

Supplement to Improving Family Meetings in the Pediatric CICUK23HL141700 · NHLBI · CHILDREN'S HOSP OF PHILADELPHIA · PI WALTER, JENNIFER K · 2019 to 2023
$981k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL141700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo develop consensus statements on continuity strategies using primary intensivists, primary nurses, and recurring multidisciplinary team meetings for long-stay patients (LSPs) in PICUs.

participantsThe multidisciplinary Lucile Packard Foundation PICU Continuity Panel comprising parents of children who had prolonged PICU stays and experts in several specialties/professions that care for children with medical complexity in and out of PICUs. DESIGN/

methodsWe used modified RAND Delphi methodology, with a comprehensive literature review, Delphi surveys, and a conference, to reach consensus. The literature review resulted in a synthesized bibliography, which was provided to panelists. We used an iterative process to generate draft statements following panelists' completion of four online surveys with open-ended questions on implementing and sustaining continuity strategies. Panelists were anonymous when they voted on revised draft statements. Agreement of 80% constituted consensus. At a 3-day virtual conference, we discussed, revised, and re-voted on statements not reaching or barely reaching consensus. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to assess the quality of the evidence and rate the statements' strength. The Panel also generated outcome, process, and balancing metrics to evaluate continuity strategies.

resultsThe Panel endorsed 17 consensus statements in five focus areas of continuity strategies (Eligibility Criteria, Initiation, Standard Responsibilities, Resources Needed to Implement, Resources Needed to Sustain). The quality of evidence of the statements was low to very low, highlighting the limited evidence and the importance of panelists' experiences/expertise. The strength of the statements was conditional. An extensive list of potential evaluation metrics was generated.

conclusionsThese expert/parent-developed consensus statements provide PICUs with novel summaries on how to operationalize, implement, and sustain continuity strategies for LSP, a rapidly growing, vulnerable, resource-intensive population in PICUs.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingCognitionChildHumansIntensive Care Units, PediatricParents

Identifiers

PMID38415714
PMCPMC10540754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.