ArticleChest2025
Covert Triage During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis of Rationing in Intensive Care.
Article in Chest, 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.
- When ethics is not enough: institutional governance of critical care allocation under crisis conditions.Acute and critical care · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based classification of COVID-19 severity using respiratory microbiome profiles from shotgun metagenomic sequencing.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026Article
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
backgroundWith the sudden onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, countries rushed to implement guidelines for triage. Some were unprepared. In Germany, academic discourse had focused on criteria for triage, while often neglecting their translation into clinically applicable protocols in ICUs. RESEARCH QUESTION: How did intensivists in German ICUs experience the institutional implementation of a national triage guideline and how did they respond to the resource constraints during the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic? STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsFor this qualitative study, we conducted semistructured expert interviews with 14 intensivists from various German hospitals between November 2021 and April 2022. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) being a senior ICU physician, (2) having worked in intensive care during the pandemic, and (3) being involved in institutional triage preparation. Transcripts were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsParticipants addressed triage preparation, implementation of triage protocols, and allocation of critical care resources. They stressed legal uncertainty as a major barrier to implementing said protocols. We identified the potentially harmful phenomenon of what we term covert triage: preemptive, nontransparent, and improvised rationing to avoid exhaustion of capacity which would have triggered official triage. To keep ICU beds free for patients with more promising prognoses, intensivists resorted to 2 main strategies: raising informal crisis standards of care (covert triage type I) and directing decision-making conversations to dissuade patients and relatives from seeking intensive care treatment (covert triage type II).
interpretationThis study highlights how legal uncertainty impaired institutional pandemic preparedness and the development of actionable triage protocols, which in turn led to covert triage: a nontransparent combination of intensivist-led decision-making and bedside rationing. Allocating limited resources requires shared interdisciplinary responsibility between medical teams, scientists, health law experts, and politicians to proactively establish legal regulations, translate ethical norms into guidelines, and implement actionable protocols.
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.