ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2014
Should they have a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy? the importance of assessing decision-making capacity and the central role of a multidisciplinary team.
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enteral Nutrition in Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease and Atypical Parkinsonism: A Systematic Review.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2026Pooled it
- Applying the Timing It Right Framework to Caregiver Experiences and Needs in Adult Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy: A Longitudinal Qualitative Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Frequency and outcomes of gastrostomy insertion in a longitudinal cohort study of atypical parkinsonism.European journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Outcomes of a Decision-Making Capacity Assessment Model at the Grey Nuns Community Hospital.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Prevention and management of major complications in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Eating and drinking interventions for people at risk of lacking decision-making capacity: who decides and how?BMC medical ethics · 2015Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decisions about percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) can be clinically and ethically challenging, particularly when patients lack decision-making capacity. As the age of the UK population rises, with the associated increase in prevalence of dementias and neurodegenerative diseases, it is becoming an increasingly important issue for clinicians. The recent review and subsequent withdrawal of the Liverpool Care Pathway highlighted feeding as a particular area of concern. The authors undertook a 1-year retrospective review of individuals referred to the feeding issues multidisciplinary team (FIMDT) at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK, in 2011. The majority of patients referred (n = 158) had a primary diagnosis of cancer (44%). The second largest group was those who had had a stroke or brain haemorrhage (13%). Twenty-eight per cent of patients had no, or uncertain, decision-making capacity on at least one occasion during decision-making. There are reflections on the role of a multidisciplinary team in the process of decision-making for these complex patients.
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.