ReviewMedicine, health care, and philosophy2011
Avoiding bias in medical ethical decision-making. Lessons to be learnt from psychology research.
Review in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and narrative synthesis of surgeons' perception of postoperative outcomes and risk.BJS open · 2020Pooled it
- Introducing the Metaphorical Anchor Model: A Mixed-Methods Study of Cognitive Metaphor Use in Palliative Care.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Emotional Responses in Clinical Ethics Consultation Decision-Making: An Exploratory Study.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluating cognitive bias in clinical ethics supports: a scoping review.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Surgeon attitudes toward risk stratification in emergency surgery for the elderly: an ESTES cross-sectional survey.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- The role of bioethics services in paediatric intensive care units: a qualitative descriptive study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Denial as an ethical problem: the example of ICU triage in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.Asian journal of medical humanities · 2024Article
- Biases in bioethics: a narrative review.BMC medical ethics · 2023Review
- Cognitive biases and moral characteristics of healthcare workers and their treatment approach for persons with advanced dementia in acute care settings.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The Effects of Rudeness on NICU Medical Teams Studied by a New Tool for the Assessment of Decision-Making Group Dynamics.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Biases in the evaluation of self-harm in patients with disability due to spinal cord injury.Spinal cord series and cases · 2020Review
- Improving decision-making and cognitive bias using innovative approaches to simulated scenario and debrief design.BMJ simulation & technology enhanced learning · 2020Article
- Comparison of Internal Medicine and General Surgery Residents' Assessments of Risk of Postsurgical Complications in Surgically Complex Patients.JAMA surgery · 2018Article
- How to introduce medical ethics at the bedside - Factors influencing the implementation of an ethical decision-making model.BMC medical ethics · 2017Article
- Decision-making capacity should not be decisive in emergencies.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When ethical decisions have to be taken in critical, complex medical situations, they often involve decisions that set the course for or against life-sustaining treatments. Therefore the decisions have far-reaching consequences for the patients, their relatives, and often for the clinical staff. Although the rich psychology literature provides evidence that reasoning may be affected by undesired influences that may undermine the quality of the decision outcome, not much attention has been given to this phenomenon in health care or ethics consultation. In this paper, we aim to contribute to the sensitization of the problem of systematic reasoning biases by showing how exemplary individual and group biases can affect the quality of decision-making on an individual and group level. We are addressing clinical ethicists as well as clinicians who guide complex decision-making processes of ethical significance. Knowledge regarding exemplary group psychological biases (e.g. conformity bias), and individual biases (e.g. stereotypes), will be taken from the disciplines of social psychology and cognitive decision science and considered in the field of ethical decision-making. Finally we discuss the influence of intuitive versus analytical (systematical) reasoning on the validity of ethical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20652416What 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.