Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 303

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk factors for post–intensive care syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Lee, Minju, Kang, Jiyeon, Jeong, Yeon Jin·2020·Australian Critical Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to identify the risk factors for each area of post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) and to determine their effect size. REVIEW METHOD USED This study used systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched. REVIEW METHODS Eighty-nine studies were selected for the review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The PICS areas and risk factors reported in the individual studies were reviewed and categorised. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to evaluate the quality of studies. The effect size of each risk factor was calculated as odds ratio (OR). RESULTS There were 33 mental health studies, 15 cognitive impairment studies, 32 physical impairment studies, eight studies on two areas, and one study on all three areas. Sixty risk factors were identified, including 33 personal and 27 intensive care unit (ICU)-related factors. Significant risk factors for mental health included female sex (odds ratio [OR] = 3.37, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-10.17), previous mental health problems (OR = 9.45, 95% CI: 2.08-42.90), and negative ICU experience (OR = 2.59, 95% CI: 2.04-3.28). The only significant risk factor for cognitive impairment was delirium (OR = 2.85, 95% CI: 1.10-7.38). Significant risk factors for physical impairment included older age (OR = 2.19, 95% CI: 1.11-4.33), female sex (OR = 1.96, 95% CI: 1.32-2.91), and high disease severity (OR = 2.54, 95% CI: 1.76-3.66). CONCLUSIONS Although PICS is a multidimensional concept, each area has been studied separately. Significant risk factors for PICS included older age, female sex, previous mental health problems, disease severity, negative ICU experience, and delirium. To prevent PICS, the multidisciplinary team should pay attention to modifiable risk factors such as delirium and patients' ICU experience.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aucc.2019.10.004

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 48 references

Cited by

See all 303

Metadata

Authors
Lee, M., Kang, J., & Jeong, Y. J.
Venue
Australian Critical Care
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
287-294
ISSN
  • 1033-3355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1036-7314
OpenAlex
W2995399708
Cited by
303
References
48
FWCI
3.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risk factors for post–intensive care syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.aucc.2019.10.004
The paper
Lee, M., Kang, J., & Jeong, Y. J. (2020). Risk factors for post–intensive care syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Australian Critical Care. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2019.10.004

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.