ReviewCritical care (London, England)2025
Being an observer of one's own life-a meta-synthesis on the experience of mechanically ventilated patients in intensive care units.
Review in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contextualising ventilation decisions: an ethnographic study of factors shaping interprofessional decision-making.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Developing a Program Theory on Ventilator Weaning in Adult Intensive Care: Protocol for a Multimethods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe experience of patients under mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit is described as complex and multifaceted, but an overarching and in-depth understanding of the experience is still missing.
aimTo provide an in-depth analysis and synthesis of patients' experience when being mechanically ventilated in intensive care units.
methodsWe conducted a meta-synthesis according to the methodological recommendations of Sandelowski and Barroso. Our systematic literature search in Medline, CINAHL, and Cochrane was complemented by hand and citation searches. We included only qualitative studies with a rich description of conscious patients' experience under mechanical ventilation. Studies on children, step-down units, noninvasive ventilation and non-scientific journal articles were excluded. After the title, abstract and full-text screening by three reviewers, we performed initial, axial and selective coding and in-depth analysis in MAXQDA. The synthesis was supported by multiple discussion rounds.
resultsOf the 2,563 records identified, 20 studies were included in our synthesis. This revealed the central phenomenon of patients being observers of their own lives. They are yearning for a stable picture of reality and developing various situation-specific needs. Finally, patients are finding ways to deal with the situation. These concepts are interwoven in time and are experienced repeatedly in different dimensions.
conclusionPatients under mechanical ventilation are highly perceptive. Healthcare professionals are particularly responsible for patients. They should reflect on their role in intensive care and must be sensitized to patients' differentiated experience. Registration, Protocol: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/G8Q6X.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.