scispace - formally typeset
D

Deborah J. Cook

Researcher at McMaster University

Publications -  942
Citations -  165225

Deborah J. Cook is an academic researcher from McMaster University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Intensive care & Randomized controlled trial. The author has an hindex of 173, co-authored 907 publications receiving 148928 citations. Previous affiliations of Deborah J. Cook include McMaster University Medical Centre & Queen's University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Health status, quality of life, and the individual.

TL;DR: In this issue of JAMA, Gill and Feinstein take the philosophical position that only the individual can rate quality of life, and if the individual says that it is excellent, that is what it is.
Journal ArticleDOI

Clinician predictions of intensive care unit mortality.

TL;DR: Physician estimates of intensive care unit survival <10% are associated with subsequent life support limitation and more powerfully predictintensive care unit mortality than illness severity, evolving or resolving organ dysfunction, and use of inotropes or vasopressors.
Journal ArticleDOI

Mortality predictions in the intensive care unit: comparing physicians with scoring systems.

TL;DR: Observational studies suggest that ICU physicians discriminate between survivors and nonsurvivors more accurately than do scoring systems in the first 24 hrs of ICU admission, implying limited usefulness of outcome prediction in thefirst 24 hrs for clinical decision making.
Journal ArticleDOI

Does noninvasive positive pressure ventilation improve outcome in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure? A systematic review.

TL;DR: Randomized trials suggest that patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure are less likely to require endotracheal intubation when NPPV is added to standard therapy, however, the effect on mortality is less clear.
Journal ArticleDOI

An observational study of orthopaedic abstracts and subsequent full-text publications.

TL;DR: The overall quality of reporting in abstracts proved inadequate, and inconsistencies between the final published paper and the original abstract occurred frequently, meaning the routine use of abstracts as a guide to orthopaedic practice needs to be reconsidered.