Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26420014›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2015

Paternalism and autonomy: views of patients and providers in a transitional (post-communist) country.

Lucija Murgic, Philip C Hébert, Slavica Sovic, Gordana Pavlekovic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
57citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

57 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Lucija MurgicDepartment of Educational Technology, Andrija Stampar School of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. lmurgic@snz.hr.
Philip C HébertDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. philip.hebert@utoronto.ca.
Slavica SovicDepartment of Medical Statistics, Epidemiology and Medical Informatics, Andrija Stampar School of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. ssovic@snz.hr.
Gordana PavlekovicDepartment for Social Medicine and Organization of Health Care, Andrija Stampar School of Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia. gpavleko@snz.hr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient autonomy is a fundamental, yet challenging, principle of professional medical ethics. The idea that individual patients should have the freedom to make choices about their lives, including medical matters, has become increasingly prominent in current literature. However, this has not always been the case, especially in communist countries where paternalistic attitudes have been interwoven into all relationships including medical ones. Patients' expectations and the role of the doctor in the patient-physician relationship are changing. Croatia, as a transitional country, is currently undergoing this particular process.

methodsQualitative research was conducted by means of six focus group discussions held in the years 2012 and 2013 in Croatia. Focus groups were held separately with each of the following: first year and final (6(th)) year medical students, physicians engaged in medical ethics education, physicians practicing in a clinical hospital, family medicine residents and individuals representing patients with chronic disease. This research specifically addresses issues related to patient autonomy, in particular, the principles of truth telling, confidentiality, and informed consent. All focus group discussions were audio taped and then transcribed verbatim and systematized according to acknowledged qualitative analysis methods. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Patient autonomy is much more than a simple notion defined as the patient's right to make treatment decisions independently. It has to be understood in context of the broader socio-cultural setting. At present, both patients and medical doctors in Croatia are increasingly appreciating the importance of promoting the principle of autonomy in medical decision-making. However, the current views of medical students, physicians and patients reveal inconsistencies.

conclusionsKnowing how to respect the various facets of patients' autonomy should be part of physician's professional duties, and also be reflected in his or her core clinical competencies. For this reason greater importance should be dedicated to patient autonomy issues in medical education in Croatia.

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalPersonal AutonomyConfidentialityCroatiaDecision MakingFocus GroupsHumansInformed ConsentPaternalismPatient RightsPhysician-Patient RelationsQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID26420014
PMCPMC4589086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.