MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405323094 · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000001184

Rehabilitation and Social Determinants of Health in Critical Illness Recovery Literature: A Systematic Review

2024· review· en· W4405323094 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lindsey E Fresenko, Charlotte Rutherfurd, Lauren E. Robinson, Cayla Robinson, Ashley Montgomery-Yates, Rachel Hogg‐Graham, Peter E. Morris, Tammy L. Eaton, Joanne McPeake, Kirby P. Mayer

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Explorations · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases
KeywordsRehabilitationCritical illnessPsychologyMedicinePhysical therapyIntensive care medicineCritically ill

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Patients who survive critical illness navigate arduous and disparate recovery pathways that include referrals and participation in community-based rehabilitation services. Examining rehabilitation pathways during recovery is crucial to understanding the relationship on patient-centered outcomes. Furthermore, an understanding of social determinants of health (SDOH) in relation to outcomes and rehabilitation use will help ensure equitable access for future care. Therefore, there is a need to define and understand patient care pathways, specifically rehabilitation after discharge, through a SDOH lens after surviving a critical illness to improve long-term outcomes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate), the CINAHL, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: A systematic review of the literature was completed examining literature from inception to March 2024. Articles were included if post-hospital rehabilitation utilization was reported in adult patients who survived critical illness. Discharge disposition was examined as a proxy for rehabilitation pathways. Patients were grouped by patient diagnosis for grouped analysis and reporting of data. Two independent researchers reviewed manuscripts for inclusion and data were extracted by one reviewer using Covidence. Both reviewers used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess risk of bias. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 72 articles included, only four articles reported detailed rehabilitation utilization. The majority of the studies included were cohort studies (91.7%) with most articles using a retrospective design (56.9%). The most common patient population was acute respiratory diagnoses (51.4%). Most patients were discharged directly home from the hospital (75.4%). Race/ethnicity was the most frequently reported SDOH (43.1%) followed by insurance status (13.9%) and education (13.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The small number of articles describing rehabilitative utilization allows for limited understanding of rehabilitation pathways following critical illness. The reporting of detailed rehabilitation utilization and SDOH are limited in the literature but may play a vital role in the recovery and outcomes of survivors of critical illness.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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