SynthesisAnaesthesia2025
Mechanisms underlying neurocognitive dysfunction following critical illness: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a cognitive rehabilitation intervention to support patients during and after intensive care admission: a stakeholder-informed study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Neurocognitive Aging Following Acute Illness: Pathobiology and a Framework for Developing Neurotherapeutic Agents.Brain and behavior · 2026Review
- Neurological Complications in Intensive Care Units: From Delirium to Long-Term Cognitive Dysfunction-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCognitive impairment is a significant healthcare problem globally and its prevalence is projected to affect over 150 million people worldwide. Survivors of critical illness are impacted frequently by long-term neurocognitive dysfunction regardless of presenting illness, but the mechanisms are poorly understood. The goal of this review was to synthesise the existing evidence regarding potential mechanisms underlying neurocognitive dysfunction following critical illness in order to guide potential avenues for future research.
methodsWe performed a systematic search of the literature for studies published between 1 January 1974 and 15 July 2023. We included publications involving adult patients with critical illness due to any aetiology that assessed for cognitive impairment following recovery from illness, and explored or investigated potential underlying causative mechanisms. The quality and risk of bias of the individual studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
resultsOf the 7658 reviewed references, 37 studies comprising 4344 patients were selected for inclusion. Most studies were single centre with sample sizes of < 100 patients. The proportion of patients with long-term cognitive impairment ranged from 13% to 100%. A wide variety of theoretical mechanisms were explored, with biomarkers and neuroimaging utilised most frequently. Many studies reported associations between investigated mechanisms and reduced cognition; several of these mechanisms have been implicated in other forms of long-term neurodegenerative conditions. Increased levels of inflammatory cytokines during acute illness and white matter hyperintensities on neuroimaging following recovery were the associations reported most commonly. DISCUSSION: The underlying pathophysiology of neurocognitive decline after critical illness is not yet understood fully. The mechanisms implicated in other neurodegenerative conditions suggest that this may represent an accelerated version of the same processes. Large scale studies are required to further elucidate the cause of this significant problem for survivors of critical illness.
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.