Trial reportCancer2013
Patient-physician communication about code status preferences: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Cancer, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are the MORECare guidelines on reporting of attrition in palliative care research populations appropriate? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.BMC palliative care · 2020Pooled it
- Association of Communication Interventions to Discuss Code Status With Patient Decisions for Do-Not-Resuscitate Orders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2019Pooled it
- Communication Tools for End-of-Life Decision-Making in Ambulatory Care Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Patient Preferences for Code Status Discussions: A Randomized Trial of Information- vs. Patient Values-Centered Frameworks.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Challenging the Status Quo of Physician Attire in the Palliative Care Setting.The oncologist · 2020Trial
- Creating and administering video vignettes for a study examining the communication of diagnostic uncertainty: methodological insights to improve accessibility for researchers and participants.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Recommendation-making in the emergency department: A qualitative study of how Canadian emergency physicians guide treatment decisions about resuscitation in critically ill patients.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2023Article
- Pancreatic transplant surgery and stem cell therapy: Finding the balance between therapeutic advances and ethical principles.World journal of stem cells · 2022Review
- A Qualitative Study on Nudging and Palliative Care: "An Attractive but Misleading Concept".International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The Motion of the Italian National Bioethics Committee on Aggressive Treatment towards Children with Limited Life Expectancy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Assessment of Discordance Between Surrogate Care Goals and Medical Treatment Provided to Older Adults With Serious Illness.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Information, Sharing, and Self-Determination: Understanding the Current Challenges for the Improvement of Pediatric Care Pathways.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2020Article
- The Effect of Message Content and Clinical Outcome on Patients' Perception of Physician Compassion: A Randomized Controlled Trial.The oncologist · 2018Article
- Do-not-resuscitate consent signed by patients indicates a more favorable quality of end-of-life care for patients with advanced cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017Article
- Influences of "do-not-resuscitate order" prohibition on CPR outcomes.Turkish journal of emergency medicine · 2016Article
- 'We have to discuss it': cancer patients' advance care planning impressions following educational information about cardiopulmonary resuscitation.Psycho-oncology · 2015Article
- Which treatment is better? Ascertaining patient preferences with crossover randomized controlled trials.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2015Review
- Code status and resuscitation options in the electronic health record.Resuscitation · 2015Article
- The impact of patient preferences on physician decisions in the ICU: still much to learn.Intensive care medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCode status discussions are important in cancer care, but the best modality for such discussions has not been established. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of a physician ending a code status discussion with a question (autonomy approach) versus a recommendation (beneficence approach) on patients' do-not-resuscitate (DNR) preference.
methodsPatients in a supportive care clinic watched 2 videos showing a physician-patient discussion regarding code status. Both videos were identical except for the ending: one ended with the physician asking for the patient's code status preference and the other with the physician recommending DNR. Patients were randomly assigned to watch the videos in different sequences. The main outcome was the proportion of patients choosing DNR for the video patient.
resultsA total of 78 patients completed the study, and 74% chose DNR after the question video, whereas 73% chose DNR after the recommendation video. Median physician compassion score was very high and not different for both videos. All 30 of 30 patients who had chosen DNR for themselves and 30 of 48 patients who had not chosen DNR for themselves chose DNR for the video patient (100% versus 62%). Age (odds ratio = 1.1/year) and white ethnicity (odds ratio = 9.43) predicted DNR choice for the video patient.
conclusionsEnding DNR discussions with a question or a recommendation did not impact DNR choice or perception of physician compassion. Therefore, both approaches are clinically appropriate. All patients who chose DNR for themselves and most patients who did not choose DNR for themselves chose DNR for the video patient. Age and race predicted DNR choice.
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.