ArticleJournal of the Intensive Care Society2026
Identifying research priorities in adult intensive care in the United Kingdom: Results from a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership.
Article in Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Given that research priorities identified by a previous James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) for Intensive Care are over a decade old, care advances, and recognition of long-term recovery needs, we refreshed these research priorities to identify unanswered questions most important to the people who will use the research. Methods: Following JLA guidance, we formed a steering committee comprising people with lived experience of adult intensive care and healthcare professionals to define the PSP scope. A three-stage approach to establish research priorities comprised uncertainty gathering, initial prioritisation and a final consensus workshop (July 2025 to May 2026). Results: Stage 1: 542 respondents (81% healthcare professionals; 19% former patients/family members) submitted 1593 uncertainties. These were combined into 59 indicative questions. Stage 2: 441 respondents (84% healthcare professionals; 16% former patients/family members) provided ranking, with the highest-ranked 23 taken to the consensus workshop. Of these, the top three priorities are: (1) what are the best ways to prevent, lessen or treat delirium? (2) what are the best ways to promote psychological and emotional recovery after ICU discharge? and (3) how can Post Intensive Care Syndrome be prevented or if occurs, what are the best treatments, rehabilitation and support for recovery and quality of life? Conclusion: This JLA PSP refresh has prioritised 23 uncertainties for adult intensive care research in the United Kingdom. These priorities should now be used to inform the design and funding of research meaningful to people with lived experience and the healthcare professionals who support them.
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.