Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27461340›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2016

Dying well with reduced agency: a scoping review and thematic synthesis of the decision-making process in dementia, traumatic brain injury and frailty.

Giles Birchley, Kerry Jones, Richard Huxtable, Jeremy Dixon, Jenny Kitzinger, Linda Clare

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Assessing Decision-Making Tools for Meaningful Discussions About Transfer Decisions From Long-Term Care to Hospital: A Scoping Review.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Decision-making capacity assessments in New Zealand and Australia: a systematised review.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. A rapid scoping review of end-of-life conversations with frail older adults in Canada.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Giles BirchleyCentre for Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. giles.birchley@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2973-2163
Kerry JonesFaculty of Health and Social Care, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Richard HuxtableCentre for Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Jeremy DixonDepartment of Social and Policy Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Jenny KitzingerComa and Disorders of Consciousness Research Centre, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Linda ClareREACH: The Centre for Research in Ageing and Cognitive Health, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn most Anglophone nations, policy and law increasingly foster an autonomy-based model, raising issues for large numbers of people who fail to fit the paradigm, and indicating problems in translating practical and theoretical understandings of 'good death' to policy. Three exemplar populations are frail older people, people with dementia and people with severe traumatic brain injury. We hypothesise that these groups face some over-lapping challenges in securing good end-of-life care linked to their limited agency. To better understand these challenges, we conducted a scoping review and thematic synthesis.

methodsTo capture a range of literature, we followed established scoping review methods. We then used thematic synthesis to describe the broad themes emerging from this literature.

resultsInitial searches generated 22,375 references, and screening yielded 49, highly heterogeneous, studies that met inclusion criteria, encompassing 12 countries and a variety of settings. The thematic synthesis identified three themes: the first concerned the processes of end-of-life decision-making, highlighting the ambiguity of the dominant shared decision-making process, wherein decisions are determined by families or doctors, sometimes explicitly marginalising the antecedent decisions of patients. Despite this marginalisation, however, the patient does play a role both as a social presence and as an active agent, by whose actions the decisions of those with authority are influenced. The second theme examined the tension between predominant notions of a good death as 'natural' and the drive to medicalise death through the lens of the experiences and actions of those faced with the actuality of death. The final theme considered the concept of antecedent end-of-life decision-making (in all its forms), its influence on policy and decision-making, and some caveats that arise from the studies.

conclusionsTogether these three themes indicate a number of directions for future research, which are likely to be applicable to other conditions that result in reduced agency. Above all, this review emphasises the need for new concepts and fresh approaches to end of life decision-making that address the needs of the growing population of frail older people, people with dementia and those with severe traumatic brain injury.

Indexed as

Advance DirectivesBrain Injuries, TraumaticDecision MakingDementiaFrail ElderlyMental CompetencyTerminal CareAgedAttitude to DeathFamilyHumansInformed ConsentMedicalizationPatient ParticipationPhysiciansUncertaintyDecision-makingDementiaEnd-of-lifeFrailtyGood DeathMental capacityScoping reviewThematic synthesisTraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID27461340
PMCPMC4962460

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.