Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26976676›Full record

ArticleResuscitation2016

Themes and variations: An exploratory international investigation into resuscitation decision-making.

Alexander J O Gibbs, Alexandra C Malyon, Zoë B McC Fritz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Ethical challenges in resuscitation.Intensive care medicine · 2018
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

3 authors.

Alexander J O GibbsGonville & Caius College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Alexandra C MalyonDepartment of Acute Medicine, Cambridge University Hospitals, Box 148, Hills Road, Cambridge, UK.
Zoë B McC FritzDepartment of Acute Medicine, Cambridge University Hospitals, Box 148, Hills Road, Cambridge, UK; Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. Electronic address: zoe.fritz@addenbrookes.nhs.uk.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT100557MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDo Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions are made in hospitals throughout the globe. International variation in clinicians' perception of DNACPR decision-making and implementation and the factors influencing such variation has not previously been explored.

methodsA questionnaire asking how DNACPR decisions are made, communicated and perceived in their country was composed: it consisted of seven closed-answer and four open-answer questions. It was distributed to 143 medical professionals with prior published material relating to DNACPR decisions. Under-represented geographical areas were identified and an additional 34 physicians were contacted through medical colleagues and students at the university hospital from which this study was based. The respondents had 4 weeks to answer the questionnaire.

results78 responses (44%) were received from 43 countries. All continents were represented. 88% of respondents reported a method for implementing DNACPR decisions, 90% of which discussed resuscitation wishes with the patient at least half of the time. 94% of respondents thought that national guidance for DNACPR order implementation should exist; 53% of countries surveyed reported existence of such guidance. Cultural attitudes towards death, medical education and culture, health economics and the societal role of family were commonly identified as factors influencing perception of DNACPR decisions.

conclusionsThe majority of countries surveyed make some form of DNACPR decision but differing cultures and economic status contribute towards a heterogeneity of approaches to resuscitation decision-making. Adequacy of relevant medical education and national policy are two areas that were regularly identified as impacting upon the processes of DNACPR decision-making and implementation.

Indexed as

Decision MakingResuscitation OrdersAttitude of Health PersonnelAttitude to DeathCardiopulmonary ResuscitationCommunicationHumansPhysiciansPractice Guidelines as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesTerminal CareInternational perspectivesPhysician–patient relationshipResuscitation decisionsResuscitation orders

Identifiers

PMID26976676
PMCPMC4879149

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.