GuidelineCritical care medicine2016
Shared Decision Making in ICUs: An American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement.
Guideline in Critical care medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 208 papers, 9 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.
Evaluation of a Context-adapted Decision Aid Supporting Critically Ill Patients' Decisions About Life-sustaining Therapies - a Pilot Project
Evolution of European Ethical Resuscitation and End-of-Life Practices From 2014 to 2019: A Survey-based Comparative Evaluation
Who cites it
208 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- [S3 guideline on sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up care-update 2025].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2025Guideline
- Part 3: Ethics: 2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.Circulation · 2025Guideline
- Assessing palliative care practices in intensive care units and interpreting them using the lens of appropriate care concepts. An umbrella review.Intensive care medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- [S3 Guideline Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and aftercare : Long version].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2020Guideline
- Intensive care unit length of stay is reduced by protocolized family support intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Intensive care medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Association of Surrogate Decision-making Interventions for Critically Ill Adults With Patient, Family, and Resource Use Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2019Pooled it
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016.Intensive care medicine · 2017Guideline
- Shared Decision-Making in Intensive Care Units. Executive Summary of the American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2016Guideline
- Symptoms of Anxiety, Depression, and Stress among Families of Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Longitudinal Clinical Trial.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Trial
- Challenges faced by families of critically ill patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.Patient education and counseling · 2022Trial
- A psychometric evaluation of the Family Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale among surrogate decision-makers of the critically ill.Palliative & supportive care · 2020Trial
- Goals-of-care decision aid for critically ill patients with TBI: Development and feasibility testing.Neurology · 2020Trial
- Trial
- Effects of a Personalized Web-Based Decision Aid for Surrogate Decision Makers of Patients With Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Annals of internal medicine · 2019Trial
- How acceptable is paternalism? A survey-based study of clinician and nonclinician opinions on paternalistic decision making.AJOB empirical bioethicsTrial
- Early Clinical Mediation in End-of-Life Disputes: A Procedural Justice Analysis.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Surviving Sepsis Campaign beyond survival: aligning sepsis care with patient goals.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Physician-revised AI-generated drafts are associated with higher ratings of written explanations in end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: a scenario-based single-center cross-sectional study.Journal of intensive care · 2026Article
- Informed nondissent: an underutilized tool for the NICU context.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Review
148 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesShared decision making is endorsed by critical care organizations; however, there remains confusion about what shared decision making is, when it should be used, and approaches to promote partnerships in treatment decisions. The purpose of this statement is to define shared decision making, recommend when shared decision making should be used, identify the range of ethically acceptable decision-making models, and present important communication skills.
designThe American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society Ethics Committees reviewed empirical research and normative analyses published in peer-reviewed journals to generate recommendations. Recommendations approved by consensus of the full Ethics Committees of American College of Critical Care Medicine and American Thoracic Society were included in the statement. MAIN
resultsSix recommendations were endorsed: 1) DEFINITION: Shared decision making is a collaborative process that allows patients, or their surrogates, and clinicians to make healthcare decisions together, taking into account the best scientific evidence available, as well as the patient's values, goals, and preferences. 2) Clinicians should engage in a shared decision making process to define overall goals of care (including decisions regarding limiting or withdrawing life-prolonging interventions) and when making major treatment decisions that may be affected by personal values, goals, and preferences. 3) Clinicians should use as their "default" approach a shared decision making process that includes three main elements: information exchange, deliberation, and making a treatment decision. 4) A wide range of decision-making approaches are ethically supportable, including patient- or surrogate-directed and clinician-directed models. Clinicians should tailor the decision-making process based on the preferences of the patient or surrogate. 5) Clinicians should be trained in communication skills. 6) Research is needed to evaluate decision-making strategies.
conclusionsPatient and surrogate preferences for decision-making roles regarding value-laden choices range from preferring to exercise significant authority to ceding such authority to providers. Clinicians should adapt the decision-making model to the needs and preferences of the patient or surrogate.
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.