Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25273677›Full record

ArticlePalliative & supportive care2015

Patients' priorities for treatment decision making during periods of incapacity: quantitative survey.

Annette Rid, Robert Wesley, Mark Pavlick, Sharon Maynard, Katalin Roth, David Wendler

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Palliative & supportive care, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02898194 (Focus Groups to Determine Surrogates' Views Regarding Patient Preference Predictors), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02898194 completednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Focus Groups to Determine Surrogates' Views Regarding Patient Preference Predictors

TypeobservationalSponsorNational Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC)Ran2018 to 2020Enrolled27ConditionsNormal Physiology
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Annette RidDepartment of Social Science,Health & Medicine, King's College London,London,United Kingdom.
Robert WesleyBiostatistics & Clinical Epidemiology Service,The Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health,Bethesda,Maryland.
Mark PavlickSt. Elizabeth's Hospital,Washington,District of Columbia.
Sharon MaynardNephrology Division,University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine,Lehigh Valley Health Network,Allentown,Pennsylvania.
Katalin RothDepartment of Medicine,George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates,Washington,District of Columbia.
David WendlerDepartment of Bioethics,The Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health,Bethesda,Maryland.

Funding

Surrogate Decision MakingZIACL010536 · CLC · CLINICAL CENTER · PI WENDLER, DAVID S · 2010 to 2025
$0k
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA CL010536
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveClinical practice aims to respect patient autonomy by basing treatment decisions for incapacitated patients on their own preferences. Yet many patients do not complete an advance directive, and those who do frequently just designate a family member to make decisions for them. This finding raises the concern that clinical practice may be based on a mistaken understanding of patient priorities. The present study aimed to collect systematic data on how patients prioritize the goals of treatment decision making.

methodWe employed a self-administered, quantitative survey of patients in a tertiary care center.

resultsSome 80% or more of the 1169 respondents (response rate = 59.8%) ranked six of eight listed goals for treatment decision making as important. When asked which goal was most important, 38.8% identified obtaining desired or avoiding unwanted treatments, 20.0% identified minimizing stress or financial burden on their family, and 14.6% identified having their family help to make treatment decisions. No single goal was designated as most important by 25.0% of participants. SIGNIFICANCE OF

resultsPatients endorsed three primary goals with respect to decision making during periods of incapacity: being treated consistent with their own preferences; minimizing the burden on their family; and involving their family in the decision-making process. However, no single goal was prioritized by a clear majority of patients. These findings suggest that advance care planning should not be limited to documenting patients' treatment preferences. Clinicians should also discuss and document patients' priorities for how decisions are to be made. Moreover, future research should evaluate ways to modify current practice to promote all three of patients primary goals for treatment decision making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingFamily RelationsPatient PreferenceProxyAdultAdvance Care PlanningAgedDistrict of ColumbiaFamily CharacteristicsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesAdvance care planningAdvance directiveIncapacitated patientsPatient prioritiesSurrogate decision making

Identifiers

PMID25273677
PMCPMC5535787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.