MétaCan
← all works

Challenges in conducting long-term outcomes studies in critical care

2019· review· en· 61 citations· W2965687105 on OpenAlex· 10.1097/mcc.0000000000000650

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

The three-model screen

all 1,000 screened works →

All three models called this metaresearch. It is in the settled core of the field.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8T1
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Review of the methodological challenges of long-term follow-up studies in critical care: attrition, missing data, lack of standardized outcomes and covariate reporting, and proposed methodological solutions; the object is how this research is done.

GPT-5.6 (high)T1
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

It directly examines methodological challenges in conducting long-term critical-care outcome studies.

Grok 4.5T1
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Review of methodological challenges in conducting and completing long-term critical care outcomes research.

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Evaluating longer term mortality, morbidity, and quality of life in survivors of critical illness is a research priority. This review details the challenges of long-term follow-up studies of critically ill patients and highlights recently proposed methodological solutions. RECENT FINDINGS: Barriers to long-term follow-up studies of critical care survivors include high rates of study attrition because of death or loss to follow-up, data missingness from experienced morbidity, and lack of standardized outcome as well as reporting of key covariates. A number of recent methods have been proposed to reduce study patients attrition, including minimum data set selection and visits to transitional care or home settings, yet these have significant downsides as well. Conducting long-term follow-up even in the absence of such models carries a high expense, as personnel are very costly, and patients/families require reimbursement for their time and inconvenience. SUMMARY: There is a reason why many research groups do not conduct long-term outcomes in critical care: it is very difficult. Challenges of long-term follow-up require careful consideration by study investigators to ensure our collective success in data integration and a better understanding of underlying mechanisms of mortality and morbidity seen in critical care survivorship.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

The record

Venue
Current Opinion in Critical Care
Topic
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Field
Medicine
Canadian institutions
University of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Funders
National Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute on Aging
Keywords
AttritionReimbursementMedicineMinimum Data SetSurvivorship curveTerm (time)Intensive care medicineLong-term careMEDLINESet (abstract data type)Health careNursingNursing homesEnvironmental healthComputer sciencePopulation
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes