Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33234133›Full record

ArticlePhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2020

The impact of caring for dying patients in intensive care units on a physician's personhood: a systematic scoping review.

Joshua Tze Yin Kuek, Lisa Xin Ling Ngiam, Nur Haidah Ahmad Kamal, Jeng Long Chia, Natalie Pei Xin Chan, Ahmad Bin Hanifah Marican Abdurrahman, Chong Yao Ho, Lorraine Hui En Tan, Jun Leng Goh, Michelle Shi Qing Khoo and 5 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

15 authors.

Joshua Tze Yin KuekYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Lisa Xin Ling NgiamYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Nur Haidah Ahmad KamalYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Jeng Long ChiaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Natalie Pei Xin ChanYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Ahmad Bin Hanifah Marican AbdurrahmanYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Chong Yao HoYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Lorraine Hui En TanYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Jun Leng GohYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Michelle Shi Qing KhooYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Yun Ting OngYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Min ChiamDivision of Cancer Education, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Annelissa Mien Chew ChinMedical Library, National University of Singapore Libraries, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Stephen MasonPalliative Care Institute Liverpool, Academic Palliative & End of Life Care Centre, Cancer Research Centre, University of Liverpool, 200 London Road, Liverpool, L3 9TA, UK.
Lalit Kumar Radha KrishnaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore. lalit.radha-krishna@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7350-8644

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSupporting physicians in Intensive Care Units (ICU)s as they face dying patients at unprecedented levels due to the COVID-19 pandemic is critical. Amidst a dearth of such data and guided by evidence that nurses in ICUs experience personal, professional and existential issues in similar conditions, a systematic scoping review (SSR) is proposed to evaluate prevailing accounts of physicians facing dying patients in ICUs through the lens of Personhood. Such data would enhance understanding and guide the provision of better support for ICU physicians.

methodsAn SSR adopts the Systematic Evidenced Based Approach (SEBA) to map prevailing accounts of caring for dying patients in ICUs. To enhance the transparency and reproducibility of this process, concurrent and independent use of tabulated summaries, thematic analysis and directed content analysis (Split Approach) is adopted.

resultsEight thousand three hundred fifty-eight abstracts were reviewed from four databases, 474 full-text articles were evaluated, 58 articles were included, and the Split Approach revealed six categories/themes centered around the Innate, Individual, Relational and Societal Rings of Personhood, conflicts in providing end of life care and coping mechanisms employed.

conclusionThis SSR suggests that caring for dying patients in ICU impacts how physicians view their personhood. To resolve conflicts within individual concepts of personhood, physicians use prioritization, reframing and rely on accessible, personalized support from colleagues to steer coping strategies. An adapted form of the Ring Theory of Personhood is proposed to direct timely personalized, appropriate and holistic support.

Indexed as

COVID-19Intensive Care UnitsPersonhoodTerminal CareHumansPhysiciansResilience, PsychologicalSARS-CoV-2Death and dyingIntensive care unit (ICU)PersonhoodPhysiciansResilienceRing theory of personhood (RToP)

Identifiers

PMID33234133
PMCPMC7685911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.