Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30046872›Full record

ReviewIntensive care medicine2018

Competing and conflicting interests in the care of critically ill patients.

Alison E Turnbull, Sarina K Sahetya, E Lee Daugherty Biddison, Christiane S Hartog, Gordon D Rubenfeld, Dominique D Benoit, Bertrand Guidet, Rik T Gerritsen, Mark R Tonelli, J Randall Curtis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Intensive care medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. End-of-Life Care Decision-Making in Stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2021
    Review
  10. 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

10 authors.

Alison E TurnbullDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 1830 E. Monument St, 5th Floor, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. turnbull@jhmi.edu.
Sarina K SahetyaDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 1830 E. Monument St, 5th Floor, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
E Lee Daugherty BiddisonDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, 1830 E. Monument St, 5th Floor, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Christiane S HartogDepartment for Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Jena University Hospital, Jena, Germany.
Gordon D RubenfeldInterdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Dominique D BenoitIntensive Care Unit, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Bertrand GuidetAssistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Service de Réanimation Médicale, Paris, France.
Rik T GerritsenDepartment of Intensive Care, Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Mark R TonelliDepartment of Bioethics and Humanities, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
J Randall CurtisDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

NHLBI NIH HHS L30 HL129364
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medical professionals are expected to prioritize patient interests, and most patients trust physicians to act in their best interest. However, a single patient is never a physician's sole concern. The competing interests of other patients, clinicians, family members, hospital administrators, regulators, insurers, and trainees are omnipresent. While prioritizing patient interests is always a struggle, it is especially challenging and important in the ICU setting where most patients lack the ability to advocate for themselves or seek alternative sources of care. This review explores factors that increase the risk, or the perception, that an ICU physician will reason, recommend, or act in a way that is not in their patient's best interest and discusses steps that could help minimize the impact of these factors on patient care.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestCritical IllnessHumansPhysician-Patient RelationsPhysiciansTrustClinical studies as topicConflict of interestCritical carePatient-centered careResearch design

Identifiers

PMID30046872
PMCPMC6463282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.