ReviewAnaesthesiology intensive therapy2020
Fake news and patient-family-physician interaction in critical care: concepts, beliefs and potential countermeasures.
Review in Anaesthesiology intensive therapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- An Updated Review on the Use of Noninvasive Respiratory Supports in the Management of Severe Asthma Exacerbations.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Dissemination of clinical and scientific practice through social media: a SIAARTI consensus-based document.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2024Review
- Online Information of COVID-19: Visibility and Characterization of Highest Positioned Websites by Google between March and April 2020-A Cross-Country Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fake news has been defined as fabricated information mimicking media content in form but not in organizational process or intent. Science and medicine are deeply affected by this increasing phenomenon. Critical care represents a hot spot for fake news due to the high risk of conflictive communication, the rapid turnaround of clinical news and high prevalence of unpleasant information. Communication with patients' relatives is one of the hardest aspects. The relationship between physicians and families is pivotal to improve relatives' comfort, and reduce anxiety and pain. Fake news may undermine this relationship, posing an alternative truth between the critical care physician and relatives, which must be countered without worsening their suffering. The aim of this review is to provide intensivists an overview of concepts, characteristics and risk to better understand the fake news phenomenon and counter its potentially devastating effects.
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.