Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26374338›Full record

ReviewMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2016

[Patients' declared intentions and emergency medicine].

T Wurmb, J Brederlau

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Cognitive errors in diagnostic decision making].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2017
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

T WurmbSektion Notfallmedizin der Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Oberdürrbacherstrasse 6, 97080, Würzburg, Deutschland. wurmb_t@klinik.uni-wuerzburg.de.
J BrederlauKlinik für Intensivmedizin, HELIOS Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Deutschland. joerg.brederlau@helios-kliniken.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patients with complex medical problems and acute life-threatening diseases deserve a physician with the capability of rapid decision making. Despite an emergency scenario with several unknown or uncertain variables an individual therapeutic plan needs to be defined for each patient. In order to achieve this goal the physician must define medical indications for each form of treatment. Secondly, the patients declared intentions must be respected concerning the previously defined medical indications; however, very often the patients' will is not known. It is very difficult to define an individual treatment plan especially if the patient is not able to adequately communicate. In these situations a custodian is helpful to find out the patients declared intentions towards the current medical situation. If there is no advance directive, family members often have to act as surrogates to find out what therapy goal is best for the individual patient. The patients' autonomy is a very highly respected ethical priority even when the ability for the otherwise usual practice of shared decision-making between physician and patient is compromised. Therefore, in order to do justice to this demanding situation it is necessary to deal with the characteristics of the physician-patient-relatives relationship in emergency medicine.

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalIntentionAdvance DirectivesCritical CareEmergency Medical ServicesHumansLiving WillsPalliative CarePatient Care PlanningPersonal AutonomyPhysician-Patient RelationsProfessional-Family RelationsThird-Party ConsentAdvance directivesCritical illnessDecision makingPalliative careRelatives

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.