Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26788949›Full record

ArticleCambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees2016

Ethical Dilemmas in Postnatal Treatment of Severe Congenital Hydrocephalus.

Dominic Wilkinson

Open access · hybridAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cambridge quarterly of healthcare ethics : CQ : the international journal of healthcare ethics committees, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Paediatric palliative care for the generalist.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2023
    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

1 author.

Dominic Wilkinson

Funding

Wellcome Trust 086041
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Severe congenital hydrocephalus manifests as accumulation of a large amount of excess fluid in the brain. It is a paradigmatic example of a condition in which diagnosis is relatively straightforward and long-term survival is usually associated with severe disability. It might be thought that, should parents agree, palliative care and limitation of treatment would be clearly permissible on the basis of the best interests of the infant. However, severe congenital hydrocephalus illustrates some of the neuroethical challenges in pediatrics. The permissibility of withholding or withdrawing treatment is limited by uncertainty in prognosis and the possibility of "palliative harm." Conversely, although there are some situations in which treatment is contrary to the interests of the child, or unreasonable on the grounds of limited resources, acute surgical treatment of hydrocephalus rarely falls into that category.

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalHydrocephalusInfant, PrematureDecision MakingFemaleHumansInfantIntensive Care, NeonatalMaleMedical FutilityPostnatal CareQuality of LifeSeverity of Illness IndexVentriculoperitoneal ShuntWithholding Treatmentchildrenhydrocephalusmedical ethicsmedical futilityneonatal intensive carewithdrawing treatment

Identifiers

PMID26788949
PMCPMC4721233
OpenAlexW2277500612

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.