Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33435976›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2021

Grounds for surrogate decision-making in Japanese clinical practice: a qualitative survey.

Masashi Tanaka, Kayoko Ohnishi, Aya Enzo, Taketoshi Okita, Atsushi Asai

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Masashi TanakaDepartment of Medical Ethics, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan. tanakamasashino@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-5710-5116
Kayoko OhnishiDepartment of Nursing, Konan Women's University, Kobe, Japan.
Aya EnzoDepartment of Medical Ethics, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Taketoshi OkitaDepartment of Medical Ethics, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Atsushi AsaiDepartment of Medical Ethics, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Tohoku University · JPKonan Women's University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the coming years, surrogate decision-making is expected to become highly prevalent in Japanese clinical practice. Further, there has been a recent increase in activities promoting advance care planning, which potentially affects the manner in which judgements are made by surrogate decision-makers. This study aims to clarify the grounds on which surrogate decision-makers in Japan base their judgements.

methodsIn this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted to examine the judgement grounds in surrogate decision-making for critical life-sustaining treatment choices in acute care hospitals.

resultsA total of 228 participants satisfied the inclusion criteria, and 15 were selected for interviews. We qualitatively analysed the content of 14 interview transcripts, excluding one that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Based on this analysis, we extracted 4 core categories, 17 categories, 35 subcategories, and 55 codes regarding judgement grounds in surrogate decision-making. The four core categories were as follows: patient preference-oriented factor (Type 1), patient interest-oriented factor (Type 2), family preference-oriented factor (Type 3), and balanced patient/family preference-oriented factor (Type 4). The Type 4 core category represented attempts to balance the preferences of the patient with those of the surrogate decision-maker.

conclusionsSurrogate decision-makers based their decisions on important aspects related to a patient's life, and they considered not only the patient's preferences and best interests but also their own preferences. As the need for surrogate decisions will increase in the future, decision-makers will need to consider judgement grounds from a more diverse perspective.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningDecision MakingHumansJapanPatient PreferenceSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID33435976
PMCPMC7805133
OpenAlexW3118730063

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.