Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39072236›Full record

ArticleCritical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine2024

Establishing a paediatric critical care core quality measure set using a multistakeholder, consensus-driven process.

Jessica A Schults, Karina R Charles, Johnny Millar, Claire M Rickard, Vineet Chopra, Anna Lake, Kristen Gibbons, Debbie Long, Sarfaraz Rahiman, Katrina Hutching and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group (ANZICS PSG): 20 Years of Collaborative Research.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
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

21 authors.

Jessica A SchultsHerston Infectious Diseases Institute, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Queensland, Australia.
Karina R CharlesHerston Infectious Diseases Institute, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Queensland, Australia.
Johnny MillarIntensive Care Unit, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Claire M RickardHerston Infectious Diseases Institute, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Queensland, Australia.
Vineet ChopraDepartment of Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, United States.
Anna LakeThe Children's Intensive Care Research Program, Child Health Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Kristen GibbonsThe Children's Intensive Care Research Program, Child Health Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Debbie LongThe Children's Intensive Care Research Program, Child Health Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Sarfaraz RahimanPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland Children's Hospital, Queensland, Australia.
Katrina HutchingPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Starship Child Health, Auckland, New Zealand.
Jacinta WinderlichNutrition and Dietetics, Monash Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Naomi E SpotswoodDepartment of Paediatrics, Royal Hobart Hospital, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Amy JohansenPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, The Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Paul SecombeIntensive Care Unit, Alice Springs Hospital, Alice Springs (Mparntwe), Northern Territory, Australia.
Georgina A PizimolasPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland Children's Hospital, Queensland, Australia.
Quyen TuPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland Children's Hospital, Queensland, Australia.
Michaela WaakThe Children's Intensive Care Research Program, Child Health Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Meredith AllenPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Monash Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Brendan McMullanDiscipline of Paediatrics and Child Health, School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Lisa HallHerston Infectious Diseases Institute, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Queensland, Australia.
Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Paediatric Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Monitoring healthcare quality is challenging in paediatric critical care due to measure variability, data collection burden, and uncertainty regarding consumer and clinician priorities. Objective: We sought to establish a core quality measure set that (i) is meaningful to consumers and clinicians and (ii) promotes alignment of measure use and collection across paediatric critical care. Design: We conducted a multi-stakeholder Delphi study with embedded consumer prioritisation survey. The Delphi involved two surveys, followed by a consensus meeting. Triangulation methods were used to integrate survey findings prior tobefore the consensus meeting. In the consensus panel, broad agreement was reached on a core measure set, and recommendations were made for future measurement directions in paediatric critical care. Setting and participants: Australian and New Zealand paediatric critical care survivors (aged >18 years) and families were invited to rank measure priorities in an online survey distributed via social media and consumer groups. A concurrent Delphi study was undertaken with paediatric critical care clinicians, policy makers, and a consumer representative. Interventions: None. Main outcome measures: Priorities for quality measures. Results: Respondents to the consumer survey (n = 117) identified (i) nurse-patient ratios; (ii) visible patient goals; and (iii) long-term follow-up as their quality measure priorities. In the Delphi process, clinicians (Round 1 n = 191; Round 2 n = 117 [61% retention]; Round 3 n = 14) and a consumer representative reached broad agreement on a 51-item (61% of 83 initial measures) core measure set. Clinician priorities were (i) nurse-patient ratio; (ii) staff turnover; and (iii) long term-follow up. Measure feasibility was rated low due to a perceived lack of standardised case definitions or data collection burden. Five recommendations were generated. Conclusions: We defined a 51-item core measurement set for paediatric critical care, aligned with clinician and consumer priorities. Next steps are implementation and methodological evaluation in quality programs, and where appropriate, retirement of redundant measures.

Indexed as

ConsensusCritical carePatient safetyPediatricsQuality indicatorsSurveillance

Identifiers

PMID39072236
PMCPMC11282349

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.