MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138791039 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000005014

Postintensive Care Syndrome in Survivors of Critical Illness Related to Coronavirus Disease 2019: Cohort Study From a New York City Critical Care Recovery Clinic*

2021· article· en· W3138791039 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

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

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCritical illnessCohortCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cohort studySeverity of illnessDiseaseCoronavirusSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Intensive care medicineEmergency medicineCritically illPsychiatryInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Determine the characteristics of postintensive care syndrome in the cognitive, physical, and psychiatric domains in coronavirus disease 2019 ICU survivors. DESIGN: Single-center descriptive cohort study from April 21, to July 7, 2020. SETTING: Critical care recovery clinic at The Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. PATIENTS: Adults who had critical illness due to coronavirus disease 2019 requiring an ICU stay of 7 days or more and who agreed to a telehealth follow-up in the critical care recovery clinic 1-month post hospital discharge. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASURES AND MAIN RESULTS: Patient-reported outcome measures assessing physical and psychiatric domains were collected electronically, a cognitive test was performed by a clinician, and clinical data were obtained through electronic medical records. Outcome measures assessed postintensive care syndrome symptoms in the physical (Modified Rankin Scale, Dalhousie Clinical Frailty Scale, Neuro-Quality of Life Upper Extremity and Lower Extremity Function, Neuro-Quality of Life Fatigue), psychiatric (Insomnia Severity Scale; Patient Health Questionnaire-9; and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition), and cognitive (Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment) domains. The 3-Level Version of Euro-QoL-5D was used to assess the physical and psychiatric domains. A diagnosis of postintensive care syndrome was made in cases with evidence of impairment in at least one postintensive care syndrome domain. We included 45 patients with a mean (sd) age of 54 (13) years, and 73% were male. Ninety-one percent of coronavirus disease 2019 ICU survivors fit diagnostic criteria for postintensive care syndrome. 86.7 % had impairments in the physical domain, 22 (48%) reported impairments in the psychiatric domain, and four (8%) had impairments on cognitive screening. We found that 58% had some degree of mobility impairment. In the psychiatric domain, 38% exhibited at least mild depression, and 18 % moderate to severe depression. Eighteen percent presented Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, scores suggestive of posttraumatic stress syndrome diagnosis. In the Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 9% had impaired cognition. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of critical illness related to coronavirus disease 2019 are at high risk of developing postintensive care syndrome. These findings highlight the importance of planning for appropriate post-ICU care to diagnose and treat this population.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.243
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.243
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it