ArticleCritical care explorations2026
Non clinic-Based Interventions to Mitigate Post-Intensive Care Syndrome: A Scoping Review.
Article in Critical care explorations, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSurvivors of critical illness and their caregivers often experience a complex constellation of sequelae in the aftermath of their recovery, termed post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) and PICS-Family (PICS-F), respectively. These can have a dire impact on patients and families, and thus require coordinated rehabilitative efforts. However, optimal modes of providing support services remain unclear, with traditional clinic-based strategies showing mixed results. This scoping review aimed to summarize the feasibility and effectiveness of nonclinic-based follow-up and rehabilitation strategies for adult survivors of critical illness and their caregivers. DATA SOURCES: Databases were searched on July 8, 2025, and included Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION: Studies reporting interventions and follow-up options for adult survivors of critical illness requiring ICU stay and targeting PICS and PICS-F were included. Studies examining interventions in the outpatient clinic or ICU settings exclusively were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Two team members used Covidence to screen all the deduplicated citations, with a third team member acting as a tiebreaker. The studies included were reviewed in full to extract general data, the studied syndrome (PICS, PICS-F, or both), component of PICS studied, study population, study objectives, methods, inclusion and exclusion criteria, intervention details, general results, and study conclusions. DATA SYNTHESIS: We screened 8608 studies; 45 studies met criteria and were included in this review. Most (64%) focused on the physical and psychological sequelae of PICS. Interventions varied widely, by setting, duration, and approach. Outcome measures were heterogeneous, limiting comparisons. Most studies evaluated the feasibility of interventions and not effectiveness. Only six articles targeted PICS-F exclusively.
conclusionsThis scoping review summarizes the status of different nonclinic-based follow-up and rehabilitation strategies for adult ICU survivors. Future research focused on studies that evaluate effectiveness of these strategies in mitigating the burden of PICS and PICS-F, especially within the cognitive domain, is likely to improve aftercare for both patients and their families.
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.