Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39913627›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Protocol on a systematic review of nomenclature and outcomes in children with complex critical illness in Paediatric Critical Care: The basis for consensus definition.

Sofia Cuevas-Asturias, Claire Rafferty, Hannah Mitchell, William Tremlett, Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Natalie Pattison

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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

6 authors.

Sofia Cuevas-AsturiasDepartment of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7270-6625
Claire RaffertyPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, The Bristol Royal Hospital for Children, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Hannah MitchellInstitute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4153-7424
William TremlettPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Birmingham Children's Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2916-3973
Padmanabhan RamnarayanDepartment of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0784-8154
Natalie PattisonDepartment of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6771-8733

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPaediatric Critical Care (PCC) supports the recovery of children with severe illness. In the UK, there are 30 PCC units with a total of approximately 400 beds. There is constant demand for these beds with a mean five-day length of stay and admissions increasing at a greater rate than age-specific population growth. Prolonged stay patients account for approximately half of all PCC patient bed days. Children with complex critical illness (CCI) need input from multiple different teams alongside support for their family. CCI often become prolonged PCC-stay patients too. Internationally, there is variation in the definition of CCI, this creates service variation and tensions around what resources can be provided including discharge planning, provision, and support. Objective: The face of Paediatric Critical Care, in the UK and internationally has changed over the last ten years with a growing cohort of complex critically ill patients. This systematic review aims to look at current nomenclature, criteria, and outcome measures of priority in this undefined patient population. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Inclusion criteria: All types of studies examining children with complex critical illness (age <18 years) admitted to any paediatric critical care. The review is registered on Prospero. Medline, Embase, Maternity and Infant care, The Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Trip database will be searched from 2014 to May 2024. The search was limited to ten years as children with complex critical illness are a relatively new concept within PCC. Therefore, the timeline was limited to increase the accuracy and applicability of the review. Search limits included all languages, excluded the setting of neonatal intensive care, and age>18 years old. The final search strategy was developed in Medline and peer-reviewed by a health research librarian not involved in the study. This was translated to other databases as appropriate. Four independent reviewers will screen citations for eligible studies and perform data extraction. DISCUSSION: A systematic review methodology has been used to develop a broad understanding of the literature which will be used to develop further work in this area. Using a rigorous and stepwise approach, the whole spectrum of scientific publications on children with complex critical illness in paediatric intensive care will be reviewed, ensuring this study is as comprehensive as possible. This includes quantitative, qualitative, theoretical, and grey literature. A limitation of this systematic review is the use of many terms to describe children with complex critical illness in the literature resulting in a high number of publications on this topic.

Indexed as

Critical CareCritical IllnessTerminology as TopicAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolConsensus Statements as TopicHumansInfantIntensive Care Units, PediatricLength of StaySystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID39913627
PMCPMC11801698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.