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 OpenAlexaboutno aff
Miguel Martillo, Neha Dangayach, Laura Tabacof, Lisa Spielman, Kristen Dams-O’Connor, Christy Chan, Roopa Kohli‐Seth, Mar Cortes, Miguel X. Escalón

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations165
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care MedicineSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207