Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37122969›Full record

ArticleMDM policy & practice

"To Be or Not to Be"-Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Hospitalized People Who Have a Low Probability of Benefit: Qualitative Analysis of Semi-structured Interviews.

Daniel Kobewka, Yasmin Lalani, Victoria Shaffer, Tolulope Adewole, Kiefer Lypka, Pete Wegier

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MDM policy & practice. 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
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Portuguese Advance Directives-a twist against futility? A cross sectional study.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2024
    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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel KobewkaThe Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1812-2335
Yasmin LalaniHumber River Hospital, North York, ON, Canada.
Victoria ShafferDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2533-7115
Tolulope AdewoleThe Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Kiefer LypkaInternal Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa ON, Canada.
Pete WegierThe Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0191-136X
University of Ottawa · CAHumber River Regional Hospital · CAOttawa Hospital · CAUniversity of Missouri · USUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Our aim was to understand the decision making of patients in hospital who wanted cardiopulmonary resuscitation despite low probability of benefit. Methods: We included patients admitted to general medical wards who had a low chance of surviving in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and had an order in the chart to administer CPR. We developed an interview guide to explore participants' decision-making process, sources of information, and emotions associated with this decision. Results: We developed 3 themes from the data. 1) "Life is worth living . . . for now": Participants describe their enjoyment of life and desire to carry on in their current state. 2) "Making sense of CPR outcomes": Participants saw CPR outcomes as binary, either they live, or they die; deciding not to receive CPR means choosing death. Participants were optimistic they would survive CPR and cited personal experience and TV as information sources. 3) "Decision process": Participants did not engage in shared decision making. Instead, they were asked a binary yes/no question with no reflection on their values or discussion about harms or benefits. Limitations: The probability of successful CPR in our sample is unknown. Findings may be different in a population who is imminently dying but still requesting CPR. Conclusions: Participants chose CPR because they perceived life as worth living and CPR as a chance worth taking. Participants did not want to be left in a severely debilitated state but did not have accurate information about this risk. Implications: Decision making about CPR in-hospital can be improved if it is grounded in accurate risk understanding and the patient's values and wishes.

Indexed as

CPRpatient valuesrisk understandingshared decision making

Identifiers

PMID37122969
PMCPMC10141296
OpenAlexW4367155663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.