ArticleThe mental health clinician2026
Effects of substance use on sedation requirements in critically ill patients.
Article in The mental health clinician, 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
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of substance use on sedation requirements in critically ill patients to optimize dosing in this population. Methods: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational, institutional review board-approved, cohort study. Included individuals were aged 18 years and older, required mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours, and had a history of substance use in the intervention group, defined as documentation of using 1 or more substances within the past year. The primary outcome was the maximum number of concurrent continuous analgesic and sedative infusions required during intubation and mechanical ventilation. Results: The primary outcome, maximum number of concurrent continuous analgesic and sedative infusions, was significantly higher when comparing subjects with substance use to those without substance use (3 vs 2 infusions; Conclusion: In mechanically ventilated subjects, a statistically significantly higher number of concurrent continuous analgesic and sedative infusions were used in the substance use group, with larger doses required to sedate subjects.
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.