Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36882830›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2023

Physician-reported characteristics, representations, and ethical justifications of shared decision-making practices in the care of paediatric patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness.

Vinurshia Sellaiah, Federica Merlo, Roberto Malacrida, Emiliano Albanese, Marta Fadda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Vinurshia SellaiahFaculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Via Buffi 13, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Federica MerloInstitute of Public Health, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Via Buffi 13, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Roberto MalacridaSasso Corbaro Foundation, Bellinzona, Switzerland.
Emiliano AlbaneseInstitute of Public Health, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Via Buffi 13, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.
Marta FaddaInstitute of Public Health, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Via Buffi 13, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland. marta.fadda@usi.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite consensus about the importance of implementing shared decision-making (SDM) in clinical practice, this ideal is inconsistently enacted today. Evidence shows that SDM practices differ in the degree of involvement of patients or family members, or in the amount of medical information disclosed to patients in order to "share" meaningfully in treatment decisions. Little is known on which representations and moral justifications physicians hold when realizing SDM. This study explored physicians' experiences of SDM in the management of paediatric patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness (PDOC). Specifically, we focused on physicians' SDM approaches, representations, and ethical justifications for engaging in SDM.

methodsWe used a qualitative approach to explore the SDM experiences of 13 ICU physicians, paediatricians, and neurologists based in Switzerland who have been or were involved in the care of paediatric patients living with PDOC. A semi-structured interview format was used and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were analysed through thematic analysis.

resultsWe found that participants followed three main decision-making approaches: the "brakes" approach, characterized by maximized family's decisional freedom, though conditional to physician's judgment regarding the medical appropriateness of a treatment; the "orchestra director" approach, characterized by a multi-step decision-making process led by the main physician aimed at eliciting the voices of the care team members and of the family; and the "sunbeams" approach, characterized by a process oriented to reach consensus with family members through dialogue, where the virtues of the physician are key to guide the process. We also found that participants differed in the moral justifications sustaining each approach, citing the duty to respect parental autonomy, to invest in an ethics of care, and to employ physicians' virtues to guide the decision-making process.

conclusionOur results show that physicians come to perform SDM in different ways, with several representations, and distinct ethical justifications. SDM training among health care providers should clarify the ductility of SDM and the several ethical motivations underpinning it, rather than insisting on the principle of respect for patient's autonomy as its only moral foundation.

Indexed as

Consciousness DisordersPhysiciansChildFamilyHealth PersonnelHumansPediatriciansEthicsPediatricsProlonged disorders of consciousnessShared decision-makingSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID36882830
PMCPMC9993525

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.