ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2025
Selecting patients for ICU up-grade from general wards: role of prognostic tools.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The decision to admit patients to the intensive care unit (ICU) can be difficult, especially when it is unclear which patients will benefit the most. Therefore, identifying the determinants of complications can aid in patient therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of patients who were admitted late to the ICU and identify the main factors that contribute to their admission. This case‒control study was conducted in a tertiary hospital and included 4 years of follow-up (using medical records). The study included patients who were at risk for deterioration and admitted to clinical wards. The main measure, whether ICU admission was needed or not, was compared among the patients. We included 170 patients aged 60.6 ± 13.6 years. The multivariate analysis revealed that the qSOFA and CCI values were independent factors in determining whether a patient required ICU admission (OR = 8.25, CI 95% = 4.4-15.3 and OR = 1.37, CI 95% = 1.03-1.82, respectively); the ROC value was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.93). The Cox regression model used to assess 90-day survival revealed that only the qSOFA value was strongly associated with shorter survival (qSOFA = 1, HR = 9.42, P = 0.03; qSOFA = 2, HR = 17.7, P = 0.005; and qSOFA = 3, HR = 73.7, P < 0.001). Although selecting high-risk patients for ICU admission is a difficult task, the qSOFA score appears to be a useful tool for differentiating patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40468142What 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.