ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2022
Death and the treatment imperative: Decision-making in late-stage cancer.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Embodied decisions unfolding over time: a meta-ethnography systematic review of people with cancer's reasons for delaying or declining end-of-life care.BMC palliative care · 2024Pooled it
- Collusion in the Clinic: Constructing Patients' Moral Responsibility to Treat Cancer.Qualitative health research · 2026Article
- Review
- High-Stakes Treatment Negotiations Gone Awry: The Importance of Interactions for Understanding Treatment Advocacy and Patient Resistance.Journal of health and social behavior · 2024Article
- Article
- Unsettling the treatment imperative? Chemotherapy decision-making in the wake of genomic techniques.Sociology of health & illness · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Care at the end-of-life in the United States has expanded in the past decade in large part due to structural changes such as increased access to hospice care, the integration of palliative care, policy mandates, and financial incentives. Despite these shifts, research shows that appropriate end-of-life care continues to be underutilized. This paper uses conversation analytic (CA) and ethnographic methods to examine doctor-patient interactions among a sample of 14 Stage IV cancer patients and the way decisions unfold about next steps in treatment during a moment that larger policy changes began to take place following passage of the Affordable Care Act. This work reveals that, despite structures designed to better facilitate end-of-life care transitions for patients in late life, doctors continue to demonstrate interactional hesitancy in discussing the possibility of a patient's end-of-life in treatment discussions and an orientation to the treatment imperative. Examining doctor-patient interaction as one key trouble source in end-of-life care implementation shows in situ evidence that the treatment imperative supersedes the structural shifts supporting less medical intervention in late life.
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.