ArticleJournal of pain and symptom management2012
Dignity in end-of-life care: results of a national survey of U.S. physicians.
Article in Journal of pain and symptom management, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is Dignity Still Necessary in Health Care? From Definition to Recognition of Human Dignity.Journal of religion and health · 2024Article
- Patient Dignity Question: Feasible, dignity-conserving intervention in a rural hospice.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019Article
- Muslim physicians and palliative care: attitudes towards the use of palliative sedation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Article
- Clinical review: the role of the intensivist and the rapid response team in nosocomial end-of-life care.Critical care (London, England) · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
contextDebates persist about the relevance of "dignity" as an ethical concept in U.S. health care, especially in end-of-life care.
objectivesTo describe the attitudes and beliefs regarding the usefulness and meaning of the concept of dignity and to examine judgments about a clinical scenario in which dignity might be relevant.
methodsTwo thousand practicing U.S. physicians, from all specialties, were mailed a survey. Main measures included physicians' judgments about an end-of-life clinical scenario (criterion variable), attitudes about the concept of dignity (predictors), and their religious characteristics (predictors).
resultsResponses were received from 1032 eligible physicians (54%). Nine (90%) of 10 physicians reported that dignity was relevant to their practice. After controlling for age, gender, region, and specialty, physicians who judged that the case patient had either some dignity or full dignity, and who agreed that dignity is given by a creator, were all positively associated with believing that the patient's life was worth living (odds ratio [OR] 10.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.8-17.8, OR 20.5, 95% CI 11.4-36.8, OR 4.7, 95% CI 3.1-7.0, respectively). Respondents who strongly agreed that "all living humans have the same amount of dignity" were also more likely to believe that the patient's life was worth living (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.7). Religious characteristics also were associated with believing that the case patient's life was worth living (OR 4.1, 95% CI 2.4-7.2, OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.6-6.3, OR 9.2, 95% CI 4.3-19.5, respectively).
conclusionU.S. physicians view the concept of dignity as useful. Those views are associated with their judgments about common end-of-life scenarios in which dignity concepts may be relevant.
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.