Outcomes following admission to paediatric intensive care: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To describe the long-term health outcomes of children admitted to a paediatric intensive care unit. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed. Studies of children under 18 years of age admitted to a paediatric intensive care unit were included. Studies focussed on neonatal admissions and investigating specific paediatric intensive care unit interventions or admission diagnoses were excluded. A table was created summarising the study characteristics and main findings. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for observational studies. Primary outcome was short-, medium- and long-term mortality. Secondary outcomes included measures of neurodevelopment, cognition, physical, behavioural and psychosocial function as well as quality of life. RESULTS: One hundred and eleven studies were included, most were conducted in high-income countries and focussed on short-term outcomes. Mortality during admission ranged from 1.3 to 50%. Mortality in high-income countries reduced over time but this trend was not evident for lower income countries. Higher income countries had lower standardised mortality rates than lower income countries. Children had an ongoing increased risk of death for up to 10 years following intensive care admission as well as increased physical and psychosocial morbidity compared to healthy controls, with associated poorer quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited high-level evidence for the long-term health outcomes of children after intensive care admission, with the burden of related morbidity remaining greater in poorly resourced regions. Further research is recommended to identify risk factors and modifiable factors for poor outcomes, which could be targeted in practice improvement initiatives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".