ArticlePloS one2020
The temporality of uncertainty in decision-making and treatment of severe brain injury.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study is to investigate how time and uncertainties of clinical action and decision-making plays out in the practical work of early neurorehabilitation in order to present new analytical ways to understand the underlying logics and dynamic social processes that take place during professional treatment of patients with severe acquired brain injury. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in a Danish neuro-intensive step-down unit (NISU) specialising in early neurorehabilitation, we found that negotiation of futures takes place in the modern ICU in the present by strategically building upon past experiences. We have argued that the clinical programme therefore cannot be understood only from a "here and now perspective", since the early neurorehabilitation practice is embedded in overlapping temporalities of the past, the present, and desired futures. The study discusses the underlying logics-often hidden or unnoticed-that impact clinical practice of early neurorehabilitation, in what we have termed a logic of clinical reenactment, a logic of future negotiation and a logic of paradox.
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.