Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27835704›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Preliminary Identification of Coping Profiles Relevant to Surrogate Decision Making in the ICU.

Jorie M Butler, Eliotte L Hirshberg, Ramona O Hopkins, Emily L Wilson, James F Orme, Sarah J Beesley, Kathryn Kuttler, Samuel M Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Jorie M ButlerGeriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), George E. Wahlen Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States of America.
Eliotte L HirshbergCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, Utah, United States of America.
Ramona O HopkinsCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, Utah, United States of America.
Emily L WilsonCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, Utah, United States of America.
James F OrmeCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, Utah, United States of America.
Sarah J BeesleyCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, Utah, United States of America.
Kathryn KuttlerCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, Utah, United States of America.
Samuel M BrownCenter for Humanizing Critical Care, Intermountain Healthcare, Murray, Utah, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe Intensive Care Unit (ICU) is a stressful environment for families of critically ill patients and these individuals are at risk to develop persistent psychological morbidity. Our study objective was to identify individual differences in coping with stress and information presentation preferences of respondents exposed to a simulated ICU experience.

methodsParticipants were recruited from a university and two community populations. Participants completed questionnaires that measured demographic information and characteristics that may be relevant to an individual's ICU experience. Quality of life was measured by the EQ-5D, personality dimensions were examined with the abbreviated Big Five inventory, coping with stress was assessed with Brief COPE. Shared decision making preferences were assessed by the Degner Control Preferences Scale (CPS) and information seeking style was assessed with the Miller Behavioral Style Scale (MBSS). Social support was examined using an abbreviated version of the Social Relationship Index. Participants also completed a vignette-based simulated ICU experience, in which they made a surrogate decision on behalf of a loved one in the ICU.

resultsThree hundred forty-three participants completed the study. Three distinct coping profiles were identified: adaptive copers, maladaptive copers, and disengaged copers. Profiles differed primarily on coping styles, personality, quality of their closest social relationship, and history of anxiety and depression. Responses to the simulated ICU decision making experience differed across profiles. Disengaged copers (15%) were more likely to elect to refuse dialysis on behalf of an adult sibling compared to adaptive copers (7%) or maladaptive copers (5%) (p = 0.03). Notably, the MBSS and the CPS did not differ by coping profile.

conclusionDistinct coping profiles are associated with differences in responses to a simulated ICU experience. Tailoring communication and support to specific coping profiles may represent an important pathway to improving ICU experience for patients and families.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PsychologicalCritical IllnessDecision MakingStress, PsychologicalAdultAnxietyDepressionFamilyFemaleHumansIndividualityIntensive Care UnitsMaleMiddle AgedPatient SimulationQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID27835704
PMCPMC5105941

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.