ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Contribution of Open Access Databases to Intensive Care Medicine Research: Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of effectiveness in orthopedic ERAS: a cross-setting perspective based on the integration of nutritional status and clinical outcomes.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Contribution of Open Access Databases to Intensive Care Medicine Research: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
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
backgroundIntensive care units (ICUs) handle the most critical patients with a high risk of mortality. Due to those conditions, close monitoring is necessary and therefore, a large volume of data is collected. Collaborative ventures have enabled the emergence of large open access databases, leading to numerous publications in the field.
objectiveThe aim of this scoping review is to identify the characteristics of studies using open access intensive care databases and to describe the contribution of these studies to intensive care research.
methodsThe research was conducted using 3 databases (PubMed-MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science) from the inception of each database to August 1, 2022. We included original articles based on 4 open databases of patients admitted to ICUs: Amsterdam University Medical Centers Database, eICU Collaborative Research Database, High time resolution ICU dataset, Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (II to IV). A double-blinded screening for eligibility was performed, first on the title and abstract and subsequently on the full-text articles. Characteristics relating to publication journals, study design, and statistical analyses were extracted and analyzed.
resultsWe observed a consistent increase in the number of publications from these databases since 2016. The Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care databases were the most frequently used. The highest contributions came from China and the United States, with 689 (52.7%) and 370 (28.3%) publications respectively. The median impact factor of publications was 3.8 (IQR 2.8-5.8). Topics related to cardiovascular and infectious diseases were predominant, accounting for 333 (25.5%) and 324 (24.8%) articles, respectively. Logistic regression emerged as the most commonly used statistical model for both inference and prediction questions, featuring in 396 (55.5%) and 281 (47.5%) studies, respectively. A majority of the inference studies yielded statistically significant results (84.0%). In prediction studies, area under the curve was the most frequent performance measure, with a median value of 0.840 (IQR 0.780-0.890).
conclusionsThe abundance of scientific outputs resulting from these databases, coupled with the diversity of topics addressed, highlight the importance of these databases as valuable resources for clinical research. This suggests their potential impact on clinical practice within intensive care settings. However, the quality and clinical relevance of these studies remains highly heterogeneous, with a majority of articles being published in low-impact factor journals.
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.