ReviewVox sanguinis2021
Physician autonomy and patient rights: lessons from an enforced blood transfusion and the role of patient blood management.
Review in Vox sanguinis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The Clinical and Medico-Legal Aspects in the Challenge of Transfusion-Free Organ Transplants: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- A medico-legal approach to developing a structured decision-making process for patients refusing blood transfusions.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Successful Case of Double Valve Replacement Surgery Using Autologous Blood Transfusion: A Patient's Autonomy Preserved with Excellent Clinical Outcome.The American journal of case reports · 2024Article
- Article
- A comprehensive analysis of the readability of consent forms for blood transfusion in Spain.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2023Article
- Informed Consent in Mass Vaccination against COVID-19 in Romania: Implications of Bad Management.Vaccines · 2022Article
- The Limits of Acute Anemia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Medical Education: Patients' Perspectives on Clinical Training and Informed Consent.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Observational
- Article
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
This article provides an ethical and medico-legal analysis of ruling no. 465 of 30 May 2018 issued by the Court of Termini Imerese (Palermo) and confirmed on appeal on 11 November 2020, which, in the absence of similar historical precedents in Europe, convicted a medical doctor of a crime of violent assault for having ordered the administration of a blood transfusion to a patient specifically declining blood transfusion on religious grounds. We analyse the Court's decision regarding the identification of assault in performing the blood transfusion and its decision not to accept exculpatory urgent 'necessity' as a defence. In addition, we present an updated revision of the current standard of care in transfusion medicine as well as the ethical principles governing the patient's declining of transfusion. In doing so, we highlight that respect for the patient's self-determination in declining transfusions and respect for the professional autonomy of the doctor protecting the safety and life of the patient could be equally satisfied by applying the current peer-reviewed evidence.
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.