ArticleJournal of medical ethics2007
Attitudes toward physician-assisted suicide among physicians in Vermont.
Article in Journal of medical ethics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Relationship of Palliative Care With Assisted Dying Where Assisted Dying is Lawful: A Systematic Scoping Review of the Literature.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2020Article
- The DEsire to DIe in Palliative care: Optimization of Management (DEDIPOM) - a study protocol.BMC palliative care · 2018Article
- "We need to talk!" Barriers to GPs' communication about the option of physician-assisted suicide and their ethical implications: results from a qualitative study.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2017Article
- Multi-Ethnic Attitudes Toward Physician-Assisted Death in California and Hawaii.Journal of palliative medicine · 2016Article
- Article
- Empirical research in medical ethics: how conceptual accounts on normative-empirical collaboration may improve research practice.BMC medical ethics · 2012Article
- GPs' views on the practice of physician-assisted suicide and their role in proposed UK legalisation: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLegislation on physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is being considered in a number of states since the passage of the Oregon Death With Dignity Act in 1994. Opinion assessment surveys have historically assessed particular subsets of physicians.
objectiveTo determine variables predictive of physicians' opinions on PAS in a rural state, Vermont, USA.
designCross-sectional mailing survey.
participants1052 (48% response rate) physicians licensed by the state of Vermont.
resultsOf the respondents, 38.2% believed PAS should be legalised, 16.0% believed it should be prohibited and 26.0% believed it should not be legislated. 15.7% were undecided. Males were more likely than females to favour legalisation (42% vs 34%). Physicians who did not care for patients through the end of life were significantly more likely to favour legalisation of PAS than physicians who do care for patients with terminal illness (48% vs 33%). 30% of the respondents had experienced a request for assistance with suicide.
conclusionsVermont physicians' opinions on the legalisation of PAS is sharply polarised. Patient autonomy was a factor strongly associated with opinions in favour of legalisation, whereas the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship was strongly associated with opinions in favour of not legislating PAS. Those in favour of making PAS illegal overwhelmingly cited moral and ethical beliefs as factors in their opinion. Although opinions on legalisation appear to be based on firmly held beliefs, approximately half of Vermont physicians who responded to the survey agree that there is a need for more education in palliative care and pain management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.