ArticleMolecular and cellular pediatrics2026
Pediatric intensive care follow-up in Germany is rarely established and highly heterogeneous: a nationwide survey of 20 PICUs.
Article in Molecular and cellular pediatrics, 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
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurvival after pediatric critical illness has improved substantially, but many survivors and their families experience long-term physical, neurocognitive, psychological and social sequelae, summarized as post-intensive care syndrome in pediatrics and in families. Structured follow-up care after discharge from a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) is considered essential, yet its implementation in Germany has not been described systematically. We therefore assessed the current structures, organizational forms and barriers of PICU follow-up care in Germany.
methodsA structural survey was conducted among 20 German PICUs collaborating within the Section of Pediatric Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine of the German Interdisciplinary Association of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine and the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit Admissions Network. One representative per center reported basic unit characteristics, the availability and organization of follow-up services, the disciplines and components involved, the timing of assessments, and perceived barriers to implementation.
resultsNineteen of the 20 participating centers were university hospitals. Structured follow-up care was established in four centers (20%) and planned in seven (35%). Follow-up relied largely on existing ambulatory structures, most frequently social pediatric centers and academic outpatient clinics, and was led by pediatric intensive care specialists in most centers. A core set of disciplines was involved in nearly all programs, while the broader team composition, the components of care and the timing of assessments varied considerably; most consultations took place within four months after discharge, without predefined later timepoints. 90% of centers rated the need for structured follow-up as high or very high. The most frequent barriers were lack of personnel, logistic challenges, lack of financing and limited therapeutic capacities.
conclusionsStructured PICU follow-up care in Germany is rarely established and highly heterogeneous, despite a uniformly high perceived need. Nationwide minimum standards linked to a harmonized outcome set, interdisciplinary coordination and sustainable financing are required to translate this need into routine care.
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.