ReviewCritical care science2026
Minimum requirements for the design of Brazilian intensive care units: is it time for a change?
Review in Critical care science, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Brazilian government's minimum requirements for intensive care unit design date back to 2002 and conflict with decades of scientific evidence that emphasize the environment's impact on patient healing and health care professionals' performance and errors, jeopardizing patient, family member, and intensive care clinician outcomes. Using guidelines from the United States and Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the College of Intensive Care Medicine of Australia and New Zealand as comparators, this review showcase how Brazilian minimum requirements for intensive care unit design misalign with that scientific evidence, laying the groundwork for the development of evidence-based health policies by the national intensive care medicine society and government institutions. Five domains of intensive care unit design were addressed: patient visibility, bedside workspace, lighting, bedroom layout, and greenery and outdoor facilities. Under each domain, evidence is presented indicating that current national standards for intensive care unit design are associated with negative outcomes for patients, family members, and healthcare professionals, such as decreased safety for both patients and healthcare providers, delayed recovery, and increased work-related stress, absenteeism, and human errors. Therefore, updating Brazilian minimum requirements for intensive care unit design is an urgent and necessary step to improve critical care outcomes for patients, family members, and intensive care unit staff.
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.