ArticleBMC medical ethics2019
Advance directives in France: do junior general practitioners want to improve their implementation and usage? A nationwide survey.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Casemanagers Positioned as Key Advance Care Planning Conversationalists in Oncology Care: A Qualitative Interview Study on the Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals and Patients.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Awareness of Myopia Associated Complications and Perspectives on Myopia Management Among Parents of Children with Myopia in France and the UK.Patient related outcome measures · 2025Article
- Acceptance of advance care planning and influencing factors from the perspective of the life cycle: a cross-sectional study.BMC palliative care · 2024Article
- Predictors of advance care planning in 11 high-income nations.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024Article
- Hematologists' perspective on advance directives, a French national cross-sectional survey - the ADORE-H study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Oncologists' perspective on advance directives, a French national prospective cross-sectional survey - the ADORE study.BMC medical ethics · 2024Article
- Physicians' knowledge, attitudes and practices on advance care planning for patients with advanced cancer in a National University Hospital in the Philippines.Ecancermedicalscience · 2024Article
- Advance Directives in Oncology and Haematology: A Long Way to Go-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe doctor-patient relationship has evolved to respect "the autonomy and patients' rights". One of the cornerstones in such autonomy is the opportunity for patients to draw living wills, also known as advance directives (AD). However, information about AD available to patients remains scarce largely due to the lack of involvement of General practitioners for several reasons. The aim of our study was to evaluate current general practitioner residents' (GPR) behavior concerning their role in informing their patients about AD.
methodWe built a French nationwide survey from GPR class of 2012 to 2014.
resultsTwo thousand three hundred ten residents completed our survey (21.1% of the total population of GPR during the period). 89.8% declared their willingness to offer patients the opportunity of writing AD. When asked about the usefulness of AD, 73.6% of residents responded that these are a suitable help for patients, but 19.7% considered that AD are essentially geared towards frail patients. Among residents who want to inform patients about AD (n = 2075), 14.7% wanted to involve all patients. Only 20.5% thought that elderly people should be systematically informed about AD. When the question involves other frail people in various disease areas, information seems relevant for 60.1% of GPR considering patient with cancer or malignant hematologic disease and for 56.2% about patients affected by neurodegenerative disease. When considering the routine use of AD, 20.5% of GPR would take them into account only if they are in agreement with the patient's decision.
conclusionsThe results of the survey indicate that GPR would rather choose to decide who should be informed about AD, and when to take AD into account for ethical concerns.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.