ReviewGlobal journal on quality and safety in healthcare2024
Quality Indicators in Adult Critical Care Medicine.
Review in Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevention of arterial catheter-related bloodstream infections: current evidence and future directions.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
- The functional landscape of critical care: a nationwide study of volume, capability, and institutional variation in South Korea.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- Critical care capacity in Africa: postpandemic ICU capacity, service readiness and patient profiles across public and private hospitals in Ethiopia.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Quality of patient safety indicators in intensive care units: Protocol for a systematic review.PloS one · 2026Article
- Contextual determinants of implementation of stakeholder-selected quality indicators in Indian intensive care units: a mixed-methods evaluation within a national registry network.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- What global satisfaction scores miss: decision-making remains the weakest domain in intensive care unit care.Critical care science · 2026Article
- Documentation and evaluation of care of dying patients.Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
- Predictors of and hospital-level variation in intensive care unit readmissions in Japan: a nationwide inpatient database study.Journal of intensive care · 2025Article
- Transforming critical care: the digital revolution's impact on intensive care units.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Article
- Quality indicators in respiratory therapy.World journal of critical care medicine · 2024Review
- Independent Risk Factors of Failed Extubation among Adult Critically Ill Patients: A Prospective Observational Study from Saudi Arabia.Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quality indicators are increasingly used in the intensive care unit (ICU) to compare and improve the quality of delivered healthcare. Numerous indicators have been developed and are related to multiple domains, most importantly patient safety, care timeliness and effectiveness, staff well-being, and patient/family-centered outcomes and satisfaction. In this review, we describe pertinent ICU quality indicators that are related to organizational structure (such as the availability of an intensivist 24/7 and the nurse-to-patient ratio), processes of care (such as ventilator care bundle), and outcomes (such as ICU-acquired infections and standardized mortality rate). We also present an example of a quality improvement project in an ICU indicating the steps taken to attain the desired changes in quality measures.
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.