Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37220012›Full record

ReviewThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2024

Revive and Refuse: Capacity, Autonomy, and Refusal of Care After Opioid Overdose.

Kenneth D Marshall, Arthur R Derse, Scott G Weiner, Joshua W Joseph

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A chain of survival for drug overdose.Resuscitation plus · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kenneth D MarshallUniversity of Kansas Medical Center.ORCID 0000-0002-4077-2086
Arthur R DerseMedical College of Wisconsin.ORCID 0000-0003-1896-1849
Scott G WeinerBrigham and Women's Hospital.
Joshua W JosephBrigham and Women's Hospital.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physicians generally recommend that patients resuscitated with naloxone after opioid overdose stay in the emergency department for a period of observation in order to prevent harm from delayed sequelae of opioid toxicity. Patients frequently refuse this period of observation despiteenefit to risk. Healthcare providers are thus confronted with the challenge of how best to protect the patient's interests while also respecting autonomy, including assessing whether the patient is making an autonomous choice to refuse care. Previous studies have shown that physicians have widely divergent approaches to navigating these conflicts. This paper reviews what is known about the effects of opioid use disorder on decision-making, and argues that some subset of these refusals are non-autonomous choices, even when patients appear to have decision making capacity. This conclusion has several implications for how physicians assess and respond to patients refusing medical recommendations after naloxone resuscitation.

Indexed as

Opiate OverdoseOpioid-Related DisordersAnalgesics, OpioidHumansNaloxoneTreatment RefusalAnalgesics, OpioidNaloxoneDecision makinginformed consentlawmedicinemental health

Identifiers

PMID37220012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.