Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40794169›Full record

ArticleIntensive care medicine2025

What measures have been used to explore the outcomes of family members of critically ill patients: a scoping review.

Claire Brown, Peter Hartley, Faye Forsyth, Leanne M Boehm, Graham Martin, Isla Kuhn, Natalie Pattison, Bronwen Connolly, Nazir Lone, Valerie Danesh and 1 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive care medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

11 authors.

Claire BrownCambridge University Hospital's NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Peter HartleyCambridge University Hospital's NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Faye ForsythDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Leanne M BoehmSchool of Nursing, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Graham MartinThe Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Isla KuhnMedical Library, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Natalie PattisonUniversity of Hertfordshire, Hertfordshire, UK.
Bronwen ConnollyWellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Nazir LoneThe Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Valerie DaneshCenter for Applied Health Research, Baylor Scott & White Health, Dallas, USA.
Joanne McPeakeThe Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Joanne.mcpeake@thisinstitute.cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8206-6801

Funding

Telehealth-Enhanced Patient-Oriented Recovery Trajectory After Intensive CareR01AG077644 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Leanne M Boehm · 2023 to 2026
$3.1M
National Institute of Health and Social Care Research NIHR203312NIA NIH HHS R01 AG077644
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFamily members of critically ill patients are known to experience short and longer term challenges, including emotional and social problems. To undertake robust future interventional research to support this cohort, we undertook a comprehensive evaluation of the measures used in family outcome research to date.

designScoping review. We searched Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science (core collection) for articles published between 2000 and 2024 which examined the outcomes of family members of critically ill patients. Data on outcome measures, study design, and population characteristics were extracted from eligible studies.

resultsWe reviewed 9873 abstracts and identified 388 eligible unique family member cohorts. Across these studies, there were 59 (15.2%) randomised control trials, 287 (74.0%) observational cohorts, 8 (2.1%) quality improvement programmes, and 34 (8.8%) non-randomised controlled interventional studies. Most research was undertaken in USA, Canada, and Europe (n = 264, 67.5%). A total of 218 different outcomes measures were used across the studies included. In this review, 345 (89%) studies measured emotional or psychological outcomes, 85 (22%) measured family experience outcomes, 65 (17%) measured general functional status, quality of life or well-being outcomes, 35 (9%) measured environmental or social outcomes, and 10 (3%) measured cognitive outcomes.

conclusionsWe identified 388 studies which reported the outcomes of family members of critically ill patients. Over 200 different outcomes measures were utilised, exploring conceptual domains such as quality of life as well as psychological and social outcomes. The majority of studies were observational in nature with variable follow-up timelines. This review has highlighted that a core outcome measure set is essential to enable reliable, robust, and comparable interventional research in this area.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessFamilyOutcome Assessment, Health CareHumansCaregiversCritical illnessFamilyOutcome assessmentScoping review

Identifiers

PMID40794169
PMCPMC12405393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.